iftSTsns-njny 


pssmoju? 


riSpM 


syTniSSl',; 


'f^ 


^    :v         > 


i-i 


ais  book  is  DUE  of    '  .  ">  ^ed  below 


/ 


SOUTHERN  BRANGH, 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA, 

LIBRARY, 
1X>S  ANGELES,  CALIF. 


BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 


MATERIALS  ILLUSTRATING  CONTEMPORARY 

STATE  ACTION  FOR  THE  SOLUTION 

OF  SOCIAL  PROBLEMS 


BY 

CARLTON  HAYES 

ASSISTANT   PROFESSOR  OF  HISTORY   IN  COLUMBIA   UNIVERSITY 


48412 


GINN  AND  COMPANY 

BOSTON  •  NEW  YORK  ■  CHICAGO  •  LONDON 


COPYRIGHT,  1913,  BY  CARLTON  HAYES 
ALL  RIGHTS  RESERVED 


tgfie   gtftcnceum  jgregg 

GINN  AND  CUMPANY  •  PRO- 
PRIETORS •  BOSTON  •  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 

The  following  pages  are  an  attempt  to  place  at  the  command  of 
college  and  university  students  some  first-hand  materials  for  the 
study  of  current  political  and  social  problems.  From  many  volumes 
of  parliamentary  debates,  reports,  and  statutes  have  been  selected, 
in  the  first  place,  a  few  of  the  most  important  Acts  which  have 
been  passed  by  the  British  Parliament  since  the  Liberal  Govern- 
ment came  into  power  in  1905,  dealing  with  a  vast  range  of  social 
problems  and  activities  that  the  Industrial  Revolution  had  brought 
face  to  face  with  a  typical  modern  democracy ;  and  secondly,  extracts 
from  the  debates  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  in  the  House  of 
Lords  with  a  view  to  illustrating  different  points  of  view  which 
various  classes,  political  parties,  and  prominent  persons  have  enter- 
tained on  these  liberal  and  radical  proposals. 

To  study  the  social  problem  in  Great  Britain  should  be  a  valu- 
able introduction  to  the  study  of  all  the  grave  problems  that  con- 
front every  modern  industrial  state.  To  appreciate  the  efforts  of 
contemporary  statesmen  in  Great  Britain  to  provide  governmental 
solutions,  partial  at  least,  for  these  problems  should  be  illuminating 
not  only  to  the  student  of  present-day  affairs,  but  likewise  to  the 
historian  who  would  sketch  the  development  of  society  and  social 
legislation  or  trace  the  marvellous  growth  of  state  activity  in  mod- 
ern times.  And  possibly  knowledge  of  these  matters  will  not  be 
confined  to  professional  scholars  ;  the  speeches  of  Mr.  Asquith  and 
Mr.  Lloyd  George  and  Mr.  Churchill  and  many  another  have  not  an 
exclusively  academic  flavour  or  interest  —  they  are  making  history. 

An  introductory  chapter  serves  as  an  apology  for  the  title  and 
scope  of  this  book.  It  makes  no  pretension  to  deal  exhaustively  or 
even  adequately  with  any  special  event  of  the  nineteenth  century  — 


iv  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

merely  to  point  out  a  lane  of  approach  to  the  study  of  contempo- 
rary British  history  and  how  such  study  may  be  profitably  linked 
up  with  the  great  highway  of  general  nineteenth-century  history. 

Many  topics  indirectly  of  social  and  political  significance  might 
have  been  included  in  the  volume  had  space  permitted.  But,  in 
general,  land  laws,  Irish  Home  Rule,  and  Welsh  Disestablishment 
have  been  inexorably  crowded  out  by  Employers'  Liability,  Labour 
Unions,  Child  Welfare,  Old  Age  Pensions,  Budget  Reform,  the  de- 
cline of  the  House  of  Lords,  and  National  Insurance.  It  is  quite 
obvious,  too,  that  the  very  nature  of  the  subject-matter  will  militate 
against  its  permanence.  Most  of  the  enactments  herein  presented 
will  no  doubt  be  superseded,  or,  at  least,  amended  in  detail,  in  the 
near  future,  for  finality  is  not  a  common  attribute  of  governmental 
regulations,  and  the  solution  of  one  problem  frequently  acts  to 
create  another.  It  is  hoped,  however,  that  occasional  new  editions 
may  keep  the  work  near  to  date. 

To  several  authorities  I  am  under  obligations.  First  of  all 
should  be  mentioned  the  reporters  of  the  great  mass  of  parliament- 
ary proceedings,  who,  quite  as  anonymous  as  the  monastic  chroni- 
clers of  the  Middle  Ages,  have  infinitely  surpassed  the  monks  in 
the  wealth  of  information  with  which  they  have  supplied  us.  Then  I 
would  express  gratitude  to  the  compilers  of  the  "Annual  Register  " 
and  to  the  writers  on  the  London  .Times  and  the  Spectator^  from 
whose  digests  and  reports  I  have  drawn  freely.  And  I  would  con- 
fess the  stimulus  which  has  been  given  this  work  by  the  perusal 
of  the  writings  of  such  enthusiastic  British  Liberals  as  Mr.  David 
Lloyd  George,  Mr.  Winston  Churchill,  Mr.  J.  A.  Hobson,  and 
Mr.  Percy  Alden.  To  my  colleague.  Professor  Charles  A.  Beard, 
I  am  indebted  for  the  immediate  suggestion  of  the  work,  as  well 
as  for  a  lively  sympathy  with  its  purpose  and  valuable  criticism  in 

its  completion. 

CARLTON  HAYES 
Columbia  University 


CONTENTS 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 


CHAPTER  I.    WORKMEN'S   COMPENSATION 20 

1.  The  Home  Secretary  on  Workmen's  Compensation  .    .      22 

Mr.  M.  J.  Gladstone,  Commons,  March  26,  igo6 

2.  Conservative  Reply  to  the  Home  Secretary      ....      32 

Mr.  A.  Akers-Douglas,  Commons,  Alarch  26,  igo6 

3.  Labour  Reply  to  the  Home  Secretary 34 

Mr.  G.  N.  Barnes,  Commons,  Ma/r/i  26,  igo6 

4.  Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain  on  Workmen's  Compensation        36 

Commons,  Marc/i  26,  igo6 

5.  Sir  Charles  Dilke  on  Workmen's  Compensation  ...      38 

Commons,  Afril  4,  igo6 

6.  Employer's  Attitude  toward  Workmen's  Compensation      41 

Mr.  H.  G.  Montgomery,  Commons,  April  4,  igo6 

7.  Employee's  Attitude  toward  Workmen's  Compensation      43 

Mr.  J.  R.  Clynes,  Commons,  April  4,  igo6 

8.  Foreshadowing  National  Insurance 45 

Mr.  H.  J.  Gladstone,  Commons,  December  /j,  igo6 

9.  Third  Reading  of  Workmen's  Compensation  Bill     .    .      46 

Mr.  Joseph  Walton,  Commons,  December  ij,  igob 

10.  Workmen's  Compensation  Act,  1906 47 

6  Echo.  7,  ch.  J 8 

11.  Workmen's   Compensation   (Anglo-French   Convention) 

Act,  1909 72 

g  EJw.  7,  ch.  16 

V 


vi  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  II.    TRADE   UNIONISM 77 

12.  Introduction  of  Trade  Unions  and  Trade  Disputes  Bill      80 

Sir  John  Walton,  Conunons,  March  28.,  igo6 

13.  Trade  Disputes  Act,   1906 85 

6  Eihv.  7,  ch.  4"^ 

14.  Trade  Union  Act,  1S71 87 

34  ^35  ^''<:i-,  '-'^'■3^  {in part) 

15.  Trade  Union  Act,  1876 95 

3g  <S)^  40  Vict.,  ch.  22  {in  part) 

16.  Conspiracy  and  Protection  of  Proi-erty  Act,  1875    •    •      9^ 

j(?  &^  3g  Vict.,  ck.  86  (in  part) 

17.  Labour  and  the  Payment  of  Members  of  Parliament      102 

Mr.  Arthur  Lee  and  Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald,   Commons, 
August  10,  igi I 

CHAPTER  III.    CHILD  WELFARE 107 

18.  Provision  of  Meals  for  School  Children no 

Mr.  W.  T.  Wilson,  Com7nons,  March  2,  igob 

19.  Opposition  to  Provision  of  Meals 112 

Mr.  Harold  Cox,  Commons,  March  2,  igo6 

20.  Government  Advocacy  of  Provision  of  Meals   ....     116 

Mr.  Augustine  Birrell,  Coninions,  March  2,  igo6 

21.  Education  (Provision  of  Meals)  Act,  1906 119 

6  Eihv.  7,  ch.§j 

22.  Introduction  of  Notifications  of  Birth  Bill,  1907  .    .    122 

Lord  Robert  Cecil,  Commons,  April  23,  igoj 

23.  Introduction  of  Children  Bill,   1908 124 

Mr.  Herbert  Samuel,  Commons,  February  10,  igoS 

CHAPTER  IV.    OLD   AGE   PENSIONS 130 

24.  Promise  of  Old  Age  Pensions 134 

Mr.  H.  II.  Asquith,  Commons,  April  iS,  igoj 

25.  Renewed  Promise  of  Old  Age  Pensions 138 

Mr.  H.  H.  Asquith,  Commons,  May  J,  igo8 


CONTENTS  vii 

PAGE 

26.  Second  Reading  of  Old  Age  Pensions  Bill 140 

Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  Commons,  June  ij,  igoS 

27.  Opposition  to  Old  Age  Pensions  Bill 143 

Mr.  Harold  Cox,  Commons,  June  ij,  igo8 

28.  A  Conservative  Opponent  to  the  Government  Bill     .    149 

Lord  Robert  Cecil,  Commons,  June  /j,  igo8 

29.  Skepticism  on  Old  Age  Pensions 151 

Mr.  A.  J.  Balfour,  Co>ntnons,Jiily  g,  igo8 

30.  Labour  Defence  of  Old  Age  Pensions 157 

Mr.  William  Crooks,  Commons,  July  g,  igo8 

31.  Opposition  to  the  Bill  in  the  House  of  Lords     .    .    .    160 

Earl  of  Wemyss,  Lords,  July  20,  igo8 

32.  Danger  of  Dispute  with  the  House  of  Commons      .    .    163 

Earl  of  Rosebery,  Lords,  July  20,  igo8 

33.  An  Anglican  Bishop  on  Old  Age  Pensions 165 

Bishop  of  Ripon,  Lords,  July  20,  igo8 

34.  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  1908 167 

8  Ed2o.  7,  ck .  40 

35.  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  1911 176 

I  dr'  2  Geo.  5,  ch.  16 

CHAPTER  V.   THE  UNEMPLOYED 185 

36.  Report  of  Poor  Law  Commission,  1909 187 

Resiune f7vm  the  ^^ Annual  Register^'' 

37.  Government  Proposals  on  Unemployment 191 

Mr.  Winston  Churchill,  Comtnons,  May  ig,  igog 

38.  Conservative  Position  on  Unemployment 206 

Mr.  F.  E.  Smith,  Commons,  May  ig,  igog 

39.  Labour  Party's  Attitude  toward  Unemployment  .    .    .    209 

Mr.  Arthur  Henderson,  Commons,  May  ig,  igog 

40.  Labour  Exchanges  Act,  1909 213 

g  Edw.  7,  ck.  7 


viii  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  VI.  SWEATED  LABOUR 217 

■^  41.  Introduction  of  the  Trade  Boards  Bill 220 

Mr.  Winston  Churchill,  Commons,  March  2if.,  igog ; 
Sir  Frederick  Banbury,  ibid. 

42.  Second  Reading  of  the  Trade  Boards  Bill 226 

Mr.  H.  J.  Tennant,  Comtnons,  April  28,  igog 

43.  Sweated  Labour  and  Foreign  Competition 236 

Mr.  A.  J.  Balfour,  Commons,  April  28,  igog 

44.  A  Labour  View  of  the  Trade  Boards  Bill 238 

Mr.  T.  F.  Richards,  Commons,  April  28,  igog 

45.  The  Lords'  Debate  —  a  Liberal  View 241 

Lord  Hamilton  of  Dalzell,  Lords,  August  jo,  igog 

46.  The  Lords'  Debate  —  a  Conservative  View 245 

Marquess  of  Salisbury,  Lords,  August  jo,  igog 

47.  Trade  Boards  Act,  1909 247 

g  LLdw.  7,  ch.  22 

CHAPTER  VII.    THE   HOUSING   AND  LAND   PROBLEM      .    263 

48.  General  Principles  of  the  Housing  and  Town   Plan- 

ning Bill 269 

Mr.  John  Burns,  Commons,  April  j,  igog 

49.  Detailed    Explanation    of    the    Housing    and    Town 

Planning  Bill 278 

Earl  Beauchamp,  Lords,  September  14,  igog 

50.  Dangers  of  Bureaucracy 285 

Earl  of  Onslow,  Lords,  September  //,  igog 

51.  Friendly  Ecclesiastical  Attitude  toward  Town  Plan- 

ning     287 

Bishop  of  P)irmingham,  Lords,  September  14,  igog 

52.  Housing,  Town  Planning,  etc.  Act,   1909 291 

g  Echo.  7,  eh.  44  [in  pari) 

53.  Conservative  Opposition  to  the  Development  Bill  .    .    314 

Lord  Robert  Cecil,  Commons,  September  6,  igog 


CONTENTS  ix 

PAGE 

54.  Reply  TO  Conservative  Opposition  to  Development  Bill    324 

Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  Commons,  September  6,  igog 

55.  Labour  View  of  the  Development  Bill 329 

Mr.  G.  N.  Barnes,  Commons,  September  6,  igog 

56.  Explanation  ok  the  Development  Bill 330 

Earl  Carrington,  Lords,  October  14,  igog 

57.  Development  and  Road  Improvement  Funds  Act,  1909    334 

g  Ed'ci).  7,  ch.  4J  {in  paH) 

CHAPTER  VIIL    THE   LLOYD   GEORGE   BUDGET    ....    347 

58.  The  Budget  Speech  of  1909 361 

Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  Comvions,  April  2g,  igog 

59.  A  Socialist's  View  of  the  Budget 381 

Mr.  Philip  Snowden,  Commons,  iVovember  2,  igog 

60.  Ecclesiastical  Opposition  to  the  Budget 388 

Bishop  of  Bristol,  Lords,  N^ovember  22,  igog 

61.  A  Liberal  Lord's  Opinion  of  Ecclesiastical  Opposition    390 

Lord  Sheffield,  Lords,  November  22,  igog 

62.  An  Attack  upon  the  Sponsor  of  the  Bill 392 

Lord  Willoughby  de  Broke,  Lords,  iVovember  22,  igog 

63.  A  Financier's  View  of  the  Budget 394 

Lord  Revelstoke,  L^ords,  November  22,  igog 

64.  Ecclesiastical  Support  of  the  Budget 395 

Bishop  of  Birmingham,  Lords,  iVovember  22,  igog 

65.  A  Conciliatory  Speech  on  the  Budget 397 

Lord  Ribblesdale,  Lords,  iVovember  22,  igog 

66.  An  Extreme  Conservative  View  of  the  Budget    .    .    .    398 

Duke  of  Marlborough,  Lords,  N'ovember  2j,  igog 

67.  Lord  Rosebery  on  the  Budget 399 

Earl  of  Rosebery,  Lords,  November  24,  igog 

68.  Lord  Morley  on  the  Budget 402 

Viscount  Morley  of  Blackburn,  Lords,  A^ove>nber  2g,  igog 


X  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

PAGE 

69.  The  Lords'  Rejection  of  the  Budget 406 

Earl  of  Crewe,  Lords,  N'ovember 30,  igog 

70.  Finance  (1909-10)  Act,   1910 408 

10  Edw.  7,  ch.  S  {in  paii) 

CHAPTER  IX.    CURBING  THE   LORDS 421 

71.  Proposals  for   Restricting   the   Power   of   the   House 

OF  Lords 438 

Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman,  Conunons,  Jinie  24,  igoj 

72.  Defence  of  the  House  of  Lords 449 

Mr.  A.  J.  Balfour,  Commons, /ii  11  e  24,  igoj 

73.  The  Undemocratic  Character  of  the  House  of  Lords    456 

Mr.  D.  Shackleton,  Commons,  Jinte  24,  igoj 

74.  Defence  of  Two-Chamber  Government 460 

Sir  William  Anson,  Commons,  Jujie  24,  igcj 

75.  The  Issue  between  the  Houses  and  the  Parties   .    .    .    464 

Mr.  Winston  Churchill,  Commons,  June  2^,  igo-j 

76.  An  Arraignment  of  the  House  of  Lords 470 

Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  Commons,  June  2b,  igoj 

77.  Exposition  of  the  P.vrliament  Bill 474 

Earl  of  Crewe,  Lords,  November  21,  igio 

78.  Opposition  to  the  Parliament  Bill 485 

Marquess  of  Lansdowne,  Lords,  N'ovcmber  21,  igio 

79.  Government  Haste  against  the  House  of  Lords  .    .    .    494 

Earl  of  Rosebery,  Lords,  iVovember  21,  igio 

80.  Futility    of    Reforming    the    House    of    Lords  .  from 

WITHIN 496 

Lord  Loreburn,  Lords,  jYovember  21,  igio 

81.  Conservative  Substitute  for  the  Parliament  Bill  .    .    497 

Marquess  of  Lansdowne,  Lords,  N'ovember  23,  igio 

82.  Support  of  the  Lansdowne  Resolutions 49^ 

Lord  Ribblesdale,  Lords,  N'ovember  23,  igio 

83.  Parliament  Act,  1911 5°^ 

I  &"  2  Geo.  J,  ch.  I  J 


CONTENTS  xi 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  X.    NATIONAL  INSURANCE 506 

84.  Exposition  ok  the  National  Insurance  Bill 511 

Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  Commons,  May  4,  igii 

85.  Irish  Support  oe  the  National  Insurance  Bill     .    .    .    535 

Mr.  John  Redmond,  Commons,  May  4,  igii 

86.  Defence  of  the  National  Insurance  Bill 536  y 

Mr.  Sydney  Buxton,  Commons,  May  24,  igii 

87.  Lessons  from  German  Experience 543 

Sir  Rufus  Isaacs,  Commons,  May  24,  igii 

88.  Attitude    of    the     Latjour     Party    toward     National 

Insurance ,^7) 

Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald,  Commons,  May  2g,  igii 

89.  Attitude    of    the    Unionist    Party    toward    National 

Insurance 555 

Mr.  H.  W.  Forster,  Commons,  December  6,  igii 

90.  National  Insurance  and  Self-reliance 561 

Lord  Robert  Cecil,  Comnions,  December  6,  igii 

91.  Defects  in  the  Government  Bill 563 

Mr.  Bonar  Law,  Commons,  December  6,  igii 

92.  Final  Plea  for  National  Insurance 568 

Mr.  H.  H.  Asquith,  Commons,  December  6,  igii 

APPENDIX.    THE   BRITISH   CABINET,    1905-1912 573 


INDEX 


57S 


BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

INTRODUCTORY   NOTE 
I 

Two  historical  factors  have  conspired  to  bring  about  in  our  own 
day  a  fundamental  change  in  the  convictions  of  many  thoughtful 
persons  as  to  the  proper  scope  and  functions  of  government.  In 
the  first  place,  the  French  Revolution  not  only  abolished  legal  class 
privilege  and  defined  civil  "  rights  "  uniform  for  all  citizens,  but  it 
sounded  the  death  knell  of  absolutism  ;  and  its  great  dreams  of 
individual  liberty  and  social  equality  and  political  brotherhood  pro- 
vided a  powerful  stimulus,  throughout  the  nineteenth  century,  to 
ever-recurring  and  increasingly  successful  movements  throughout 
Europe  for  the  extension  of  the  suffrage  and  the  removal  of  legal 
disabilities  in  society.  In  France,  political  democracy  was  gradually 
evolved  through  kaleidoscopic  changes  of  Legitimate  Monarchy, 
July  Monarchy,  Republic,  Empire,  and  Republic.  In  England,  a 
like  process  was  painfully  in  evidence  during  Peterloo  Massacres, 
and  Chartist  riots,  and  Reform  agitations.  In  both  countries,  be- 
fore the  close  of  the  century,  the  electorate  had  supposedly  attained 
a  democratic  mastery  over  one  great  institution  —  the  government. 

Of  greater  importance  to  us  than  the  more  or  less  theoretical 
political  principles  proclaimed  and  exemplified  by  the  French  Revo- 
lution are  the  very  practical  problems  created  by  that  series  of 
marvellous  mechanical  inventions  and  adaptations  which  has  passed 
under  the  name  of  the  Industrial  Revolution.  Within  the  last 
hundred  years  the  whole  social  fabric  has  undergone  a  complete 


2  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

transformation,  until  it  has  brought  forth  present-day  capitalism 
and  the  factory  system  and  a  wage-earning  proletariat  huddled 
in  great  towns ;  and  novel  facts  have  presented  themselves  which 
could  not  be  faced  in  the  manner  of  the  eighteenth  century  nor 
run  away  from  as  the  laissez-faire  economists  of  the  last  century 
would  have  done.  So  long  as  highly-developed  industrial  states  — 
countries  directly  affected  by  the4«4ustFial--RevoTution  — -_gursiied 
a'  f raiTlTpolicy  ofgovernmental  non-intervention,  thej:apitalist  class 
deemed  togrow  wealthier  and  more  powerful,  while  the  mass  ^f 
wage-earners  appeared  to  grow  relatively  poorer  and  more  de- 
graded. Under  such  conditions,  written  constitutional  guarantees 
of  religious  toleration  and  political  equality  did  not  suffice  to  ren- 
der democracy  real  and  vital.  Soon  after  the  French  Revolution, 
Baboeuf  had  declared : 

When  I  see  the  poor  without  the  clothing  and  shoes  which  they  them- 
selves are  engaged  in  making,  and  contemplate  the  small  minority  who 
do  not  work  and  yet  want  for  nothing,  I  am  convinced  that  government 
is  still  the  old  conspiracy  of  the  few  against  the  many,  only  it  has  taken 
a  new  form. 

Gradually  the__ffl^orking  classes,  whom  the  Industrial  Revolution 
called  into  being,  came  to  share  Baboeuf 's  opinion  and  to  complain 
that  they  suffered  from  class  privileges  infinitely  more  oppressive 
than  any  of  those  against  which  the  French  revolutionists  con- 
tended. They  began  to  believe  that  political  rights  and  written, 
constitutions,  of  themselves,  might  be  quite  sterile,  and  to  demand 
the  employment  of  political  agencies  in  order  to  secure  equalilY-Pf 
opportunity  for  all  classes  and  the  well-being  of  each  and  every 
citizen,  worker  as  well  as  capitalist.  It  followed  quite  naturally 
from  the  interesting  union  of  two  revolutionary  currents  —  the 
political  and  the  industrial  — _that  thej3eople_of  each  affected-state 
thought  of  using  their  democratic  representative  mastery  over  gov- 
ernment, in  proportion  to  the  extent  to  which  they  had  achieved 
it,  as  a  means  through  which  to  undertake  industrial—regutetitDn 
and  general  social  control.    That  hasmeant  the  socialisation  of 


INTRODUCTORY   NOTE  3 

politics  —  government,  in  its  widest  significance,  of  the-4>e©pte 

and  for  tfie  peo]Dle. 

"  Social  politics  "  thus  becomes  a  convenient  phrase  to  indicate, 
loosely  perhaps,  the  present-day  development  of  political  democ- 
racy and  its  utilisation  for  social  purposes.  Social  equality  is  its 
goal.    Mr.  Percy  Alden,  one  of  its  distinguished  advocates  in  the  ^ 

BritishTarliament,  writes  in  a  recently  pubFshed  volume  ^  •  /"  '^ 


Without  claiming  too  much  for  the  new  programme  which  the  Liberal 
party  has  put  forward,  this,  at  least,  may  be  asserted  with  confidence,  that 
it  implies  a  desertion  of  the  old  individualist  standard  and  the  adoption  of 
a  new  principle  —  a  principle  which  the  Unionists  call  socialistic.  If  it  be 
true  that  a  positive  policy  of  social  reconstruction  savours  of  socialism, 
then,  of  course,  this  contention  can  be  justified.  The  rnajnjpoint  is  that 
the  function  of  the  State  in  the  mind  of  the  Liberal  and  Radical  of  to-day 


is  much  wider  in  scope  than  seemed  possible  to  our  predecessors.  The 
State  avowedly  claims  the  right  to  interfere  with  industrial  liberty  and  to 
modify  the  old  economic  view  of  the  disposal  of  private  property.    Liberal- 


ism recognises  that  it  is  no  longer  possible  to  accept  the  view  that  all  men 
have  arTequdl  chance,  and  that  there  Is  nothing  more  to  be  done  than 
merely  to  hold  evenly  the  scales  of  government.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
anomalies  and  the  injustices  of  our  present  social  system  have  compelled 
even  our  opponents  to  introduce  ameliorative  legislation.  But  the  Liberal 
of  to-day  goes  further.  He  asks  that  such  economic  changes  shall  be  in- 
troduced as  will  make  it  pr»ggi"h1p  fr.r  pvpyy  man  to  possess  a  minimum 
of  security  and  comfort.  Property  is  no  longer  to  have  an  undue  claim ; 
great  wealth  must  be  prepared  to  bear  burdens  in  the  interests  of  the 
whole  community.    Our  social  system  must  have  an  ethical  basis. 

At  least  since  Bismarck  prevailed  upon  the  German  Reichstag  j^^ 
to  enact  measures  to  insure  workingmen  against  sickness,  accident,  « 
unernployment.  and  old  age,  the  progressive. governments  of  every 
civilised  state  have  concerned  themselves  with  a  vast  range  of 
social  legislation.  The  labour  of  a  life-time  would  hardly  suffice  to 
study~fhe  various  forms  and  activities  of  social  politics  in  Aus- 
tralia and  New  Zealand,  in  the  Scandinavian  states  and  in  Bel- 
gium, in  France  and  in  Germany,  in  Great  Britain  and  in  our  own 

1  Democratic  England,  pp.  5-7. 


4  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

American  Union.  Yet  the  subject  is  of  such  interest  and  imme- 
diate importance  to  every  student  of  comtemporary  history  and 
politics  —  so  portentous  for  the  future  —  that  its  extent  and  com- 
plexity should  not  stagger  us ;  there  is  but  an  increased  need 
of  a  dispassionate  and  scientific  review  of  the  causes  and  results 
of  social  politics. 

II 

It  w^ould  be  difficult  to  find  any  country  better  adapted  to  an 
introductory  study  of  social  politics  than  England,  where,  in  a 
nation  of  first-rate  importance,  the  two  requisite  factors,  to  which 
reference  has  been  made,  have  been  very  much  in  evidence 
throughout  the  nineteenth  century.  On  the  one  hand,  the  revo- 
lutionary spirit  of  democracy,  since  the  time  of  Burke  and  Pitt, 
has  coursed  through  the  veins  of  the  old-time  corporation  govern- 
ment of  the  country  and  has  remade  the  body  politic,  until  now 
not  a  nation  in  the  world  can  boast  a  more  simple,  direct,  and 
truly  representative  form  of  political  democracy  than  the  United 
Kingdom.  On  the  other  hand,  no  country  has  been  more,  or 
worse,  affected  by  the  Industrial  Revolution  ;_no  nation  has  had 
graver  industrial^  problems  to  face.  It  was  in  Great  Britain  that 
the  most  important  mechanical  inventions  were  made;  it  was 
British  manufacturers  who  had  a  start  of  at  least  a  score  of 
years  over  their  continental  rivals ;  and  to  those  islands  through- 
out the  nineteenth  century  has  clung  that  boasted  preeminence 
in  industry  and  in  trade.  And  anyone  who  takes  the  trouble  to 
peruse  thousands  of  pages  of  parliamentary  records  and  commis- 
sion reports  can  begin  to  understand  at  what  tremendous  cost 
that  industrial  supremacy  has  been  secured  and  upheld  —  a  cost 
of  veritable  millions  of  human  lives  and  of  the  physical  and 
spiritual  degradation  of  other  millions.^  The  most  serious  social 
questions  have  confronted  England's  political  democracy! 

1  Cf.,  in  addition  to  the  various  Factory  Commission  and  Poor  Law  Commission 
Reports,  Charles  Booth,  Life  and  Labour  of  the  People  in  London,  and  Seebohm 
Rowntree,  Poverty :  A  Study  of  Town  Life. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  5 

Nor  would  it  be  easy  to  find  a  country  better  fitted  than 
England  to  illustrate  the  elements  of  opposition  to  such  a  social- 
ising tendency,  for  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  democracy  has 
been  evolved  in  the  United  Kingdom  suddenly,  or  without  a 
struggle,  or  that  the  entire  English  nation  have  at  any  time  thor- 
oughly understood  the  social  problem  or  been  over-anxious  to 
cope  with  it.  The  interested  conservative  classes  have  always 
had  their  many  apologists,  whether  of  the  obscurantist  type  who 
seek  to  justify  opposition  to  change  by  reference  to  the  mysterious 
workings  of  a  Divine  Providence,  or  of  the  so-called  scientific  turn 
who  aim  to  clothe  existent  inequality  and  injustice  in  the  language 
of  the  economic  schools.  In  fact,  many  clergymen  and  other 
ethical  teachers,  and  political  economists  with  their  laissez-faire 
theories,  and  lawyers  and  judges  with  their  juristic  explanations 
of  the  Englishman's  right  to  freedom  of  contract,  all  contributed 
support,  directly  or  indirectly,  throughout  the  greater  part  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  to  that  compact  conservatism  which,  in  the 
name  of  law  and  order  and  security,  or  of  sound  economic  doc- 
trine, or  even  of  God,  checked  the  growth  of  the  social  democracy 
and- prevented  the  application  of  its  remedies.'^ 

The  whole  problem  has  been  rendered  especially  difficult  in  the 
United  Kingdom  by  reason  of  an  established  church  and  a  landed 
aristocracy,  both  of  which  have  been  naturally  bent  upon  the  pres- 
ervation of  the  status  quo.  They  have  enjoyed  the  prestige  which 
belongs  to  ruling  classes,  and  not  only  have  they  declined  to  see 
advantage  in  a  change  which  might  molest  their  own  abundant 
wealth  and  large  estates,  but  they  have  succeeded  in  inculcating 
in  many  others  a  similar  attitude  of  mind.  The  Return  which  Lord 
Derby  asked  for  in  1872,  as  a  result  of  a  criticism  by  John  Stuart 
Mill,  incomplete  and  inaccurate  as  it  was,  showed  certainly  that 
in  that  day  2250  persons  owned  nearly  half  the  enclosed  land  of 
England  and  Wales,    1700   owned  nine  tenths  of   Scotland,  and 

1  Cf.  A.  V.  Dicey,  Lectures  on  the  Relation  between  Law  and  Public  Opinion  in 
England  during  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1905). 


6  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

1942  owned  two  thirds  of  Ireland.  From  the  same  Return  we 
learn  that  28  dukes  held  estates  to  the  amount  of  nearly  4,000,000 
acres,  t,;^  marquises  1,500,000  acres,  194  earls  5,862,000  acres, 
and  270  viscounts  and  barons  3,785,000  acres.  Since  1872, 
the  number  of  landowners  has  considerably  increased,  but  not  to 
such  an  extent  as  materially  to  alter  the  fact  that,  over  against  an 
enormous  land  monopoly  in  the  hands  of  the  aristocracy,  the  vast 
majority  of  British  subjects  possess  no  right  whatsoever  to  their 
native  soil.  Any  such  monopoly  is  bound  to  be  inimical  to  politi- 
cal democracy  and  social  equality,  yet  it  is  not  without  its  defence 
by  economists,  jurists,  and  divines. 

Of  course,  the  landed  aristocracy  have  bv  no  means  universally 
fvpposed  social  legislation.  For  several  decades,  jealous  of  the  in- 
creasing wealth  of  manufacturers  and  merchants  and  traders  whom 
the  new  industrial  system  immediately  benefited,  and  envious  of  this 
newer  aristocracy  that  was  springing  up  about  them,  they  contrib- 
uted important  support  to  the  first  discomfiture  of  the  new  capital- 
ists. Such  a  man  as  Shaftesbury  furnished  a  conspicuous  example 
in  his  support  of  factory  legislation.  These  noblemen  were  often 
zealous  to  attack  the  manufacturers,  but  were  rigidly  conservative 
in  the  defence  of  their  own  landed  interests.  In  time,  however, 
as  the  profits  of  their  estates  were  invested  more  and  more  in 
commercial  and  industrial  enterprises,  the  former  friction  tended  to 
disappear,  and  the  whole  aristocracy,  whether  founded  originally 
on  land  or  on  trade  or  on  manufacturing,  have,  in  our  own  time, 
discovered  common  interests  in  opposing  labour  legislation  all 
along  the  line. 

In  the  political  institutions  of  the  country  these  privileged  classes 
have  been  deeply  intrenched.  For  centuries  the  statutes  have  been 
promulgated  under  the  form,  "Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most 
Excellent  Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords 
Spiritual  and  Temporal,  and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament 
assembled  and  by  the  authority  of  the  same."  Of  course,  the  crown 
was  practically  deprived  of  its  legislative  powers  by  the  "  Glorious 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  / 

Revolution"  of  1688,  and  Queen  Anne  exercised  the  sovereign's 
veto  riglit  in  1707  for  the  last  time.  But  the  Lords  Spiritual  and 
Temporal  —  the  House  of  Lords  —  remained  long  aftenvards  a 
powerful  factor  in  legislation,  or,  more  often,  in  staying  legislation. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  not  only  was  this  House 
an  important  governmental  institution,  of  equal  powers  with  the 
Commons,  save  in  strictly  fiscal  affairs,  but  its  members,  by  means 
of  indirect  influence  or  direct  patronage,  actually  controlled  a  large 
number  of  seats  in  the  other  House,  and  although  the  passage  of 
the  Reform  Bill  of  1832  served  partially  to  free  the  Commons  from 
the  Lords,  nevertheless  the  Upper  Chamber  remained  to  our  own 
day  a  conservative  and  usually  successful  opponent  of  democratic 
legislation.  The  House  of  Lords  has  been  a  curious  survival,  a 
historical  anachronism,  in  the  progress  of  British  democracy. 

Nor  has  the  House  of  Commons  achieved  its  present  position 
without  a  very  long  struggle.  Emancipated  in  part  from  the  An- 
glican hierarchy  and  the  higher  nobility  by  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832, 
and  rendered  more  representative  of  the  country  than  it  had  ever 
been  before,  it  still  remained  far  from  democratic.  Its  restricted 
electorate  and  peculiar  method  of  election  tended  quite  naturally 
to  limit  its  membership  to  the  country  gentry  and  to  the  newer 
industrial  and  commercial  magnates ;  and  the  counsels  of  these 
classes  customarily  prevailed  in  Commons'  debates.  To  tell  the 
story  of  how  the  democratic  spirit  in  the  nation  reacted  upon  the 
House","and~how  the  reforms  of  1867,  of  1872,  of  1884,  and  of_ 
1885  were  secured,  would  far  exceed  the  spacfi-aad  purpose-ofJiiLS 
introductory  notei^  The  movement  was  painfully  slow  ;  and  it  has 
been  only  of  comparatively  recent  date  that  the  House  of  Com- 
mons has  become  largely  representative  and  able  to  assume  seri- 
ously  and  interestedly  the  responsibilities  of  social  politics.  Even 
now,  certain  property  qualihcations  prevent  some  half  million~oF 
aduff^rfEfsh  male  citizens,  who  are  in  particular  need  of  remedial 

1  Cf.  May,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  edited  by  Francis  Holland,  3  vols. 
(1912).  ,*•''' 


8  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

legislation,  from  exercising_the  suffrage,  to  say  nothing  of  all  thg 
female  citizens  of  the  kingdom. 

Without  entering  into  a  discussion  of  the  matter,  it  may  not  be 
amiss  at  this  point  to  suggest  a  possible  further  difficulty  in  the 
British  polity  —  the  two-party  system.  For  many  years  every  vot- 
ing Englishman  was  identified,  largely  by  reason  of  historical  acci- 
dent, with  one  of  two  parties  —  the  Tory,  or  Conservative,  and  the 
Whig,  or  Liberal.  The  two-party  system,  whatever  may  be  its 
advantages,  has  certain  defects,  as  we  in  the  United  States  know 
only  too  well,  —  a  devotion  to  names  rather  than  to  principles,  a 
traditional,  almost  hereditary,  alignment  of  voters  on  important 
questions,  and  a  loyalty  to  party  often  transcending  loyalty  to  the 
nation  at  large,  —  and  evidences  of  these  defects  are  not  lacking 
in  English  history.  When  one  thinks  of  the  party  squabbles  over 
protection  and  imperialism  and  Irish  Home  Rule,  and  of  the  time 
and  energy  spent  in  gaining  some  slight  tactical  advantage  for  a 
political  party,  he  wonders  whether  the  most  successful  operation 
of  real  democracy  will  not  be  through  channels  other  than  the  two- 
party  system.  At  all  events,  the  group  systems  that  prevail  in 
Germany  and  in  France,  and  that  are  now  appearing  in  Great 
Britain,  do  not  seem  to  be  barren  of  achievement. 


That  the  old-line  British  parties  promoted  real  progress  along 
certain  lines  is  indisputable.  Thus,  it  was  the  Whigs,  or  Liberals, 
who  sponsored  the  great  Reform  Bill  of  1832  and  a  good  deal  of 
the  subsequent  reform  legislation,  such  as  the  democratisation  of 

1  The  following  brief  outline  of  the  development  of  the  political  parties  in  Eng- 
land should  be  supplemented  by  readings  in  May,  Constitutional  History  of  England, 
ed.  by  P'rancis  Holland,  3  vols.  (1912) ;  Sir  William  R.  Anson,  Law  and  Custom  of  the 
English  Constitution,  2  vols.  (2d  ed.,  1896)  ;  H.  Paul,  A  History  of  Modern  England, 
5  vols.  (1904-1906)  ;  .S.  Walpole,  History  of  England  since  1S15,  6  vols.  (1890),  and 
History  of  Twenty-five  Years,  2  vols.  (1904)  ;  A.  Dicey,  op.  cit.,  and  The  Law  of  the 
Constitution  (1885)  ;  A.  L.  Lowell,  The  Government  of  England,  2  vols.  (1908)  ;  and 
J.  A.  K.  Marriott,  English  Political  Institutions  (1910). 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  9 

the  towns  and  cities,  the  repeal  of  the  corn  laws  and  establishment 
of  free  trade,  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  colonies,  the  reform  of 
the  poor  law,  and  the  mild  beginning  of  factory  legislation.  But 
the  Liberals,  recruited  chiefly  from  the  townsfolk,  the  middle-class 
traders  and  manufacturers,  and  the  dissenters  and  Non-Conform- 
ists, appeared  far  more  anxious  to  rid  their  brethren  of  black  slav- 
ery beyond  the  seas  than  to  check  the  growth  of  white  serfdom 
in  their  own  factories  at  home.  The  free-trade  agitation  of  Cobden 
and  Bright  was  the  extreme  radical  plank  in  the  Liberal  platform 
of  those  days  ;  the  party  failed  utterly  to  appreciate  the  aggravated 
distress  of  the  working  classes,  or,  if  they  did  appreciate  it,  their 
self-interest  or  economic  principles  restrained  them  from  applying 
remedies ;  and  it  was  Liberals  quite  as  much  as  Tories  who  ridi- 
culed and  suppressed  the  Chartist  movement.  In  their  repugnance 
to  a  wider  democracy  and  to  state  action  for  the  improvement  of 
the  general  welfare,  the  Liberals  of  the  mid-century  held  fast  to 
the  faith  of  their  forefathers,  the  Burkes  and  the  Pitts. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Tory,  or  Conservative,  party  were  taught 
novel  and  strange  doctrines  by  that  bizarre  and  paradoxical  genius, 
Disraeli.  While  that  remarkable  leader  never  lost  an  opportunity, 
in  novel-writing  or  in  parliamentary  debate,  to  keep  alive  the  Tory 
tradition  of  exalting  the  prestige  of  the  landed  aristocracy  and  the 
Anglican  Church,  and  of  proclaiming  them  as  the  bulwarks  of  Eng- 
lish liberty,  he  was  moved  by  the  same  Zeitgeist  which  supplied 
political  theories  to  a  Napoleon  III  and  to  a  Bismarck.  Disraeli, 
like  his  great  contemporaries  on  the  continent,  declared  that  some- 
thing definite  should  be  done  for  the  poorer  and  working  classes 
in  the  community  and  that  they  should  be  educated  to  a  proper 
sense  of  what  they  owed  to  the  crown,  the  lords,  and  the  church ; 
and  in  the  meantime,  a  vigorous  foreign  and  imperialistic  policy 
would  distract  public  attention  from  the  graver  domestic  ills.  It  was 
Disraeli  who  both  championed  the  Reform  Act  of  1867  and  subor- 
dinated social  legislation  at  home  to  the  prosecution  of  a  glorious 
diplomacy  in  India,  in  Afghanistan,  in  Egypt,  in  the  Russo-Turkish 


lO  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

War.  And  if  the  Conservative  party  were  by  no  means  unani- 
mous in  endorsing  the  Reform  Act,  the  rest  of  his  policy  they 
accepted  quite  readily,  so  that  imperialism  thenceforth  became  a 
Tory  shibboleth,  along  with  the  preservation  of  the  landed  aristoc- 
racy and  of  the  established  church.  There  is  no  doubt  of  the  sin- 
cerity and  good  intentions  of  the  great  mass  of  Conservatives  who 
supported  Disraeli's  platform,  but  for  some  reason  or  other  it  would 
not  stand  continued  wear.  Perhaps  in  the  long  run  the  working 
classes  came  to  the  conclusion  that  foreign  glory  is  not  the  most  cer- 
tain way  of  feeding  hungry  stomachs  or  clothing  half-naked  bodies. 
When  Gladstone  returned  to  power,  the  Liberals  managed  to  in- 
crease  the  electorate  consideraHl}nTy~rneans  of  the  Reform  Bill  of 
1884,  and-to  effect  educational  reforms  and  several  other  changes 
along  the  line  of  political  democracy.  And  a  few  minor  acts  were 
passed  to  conciliate  the  working  classes  ;  but  the  party  leaders  still 
adhered  too  closely  to  the  laissez-faire  preachments  of  the  Man- 
chester  school  to  be  able  to  shake  themselves  free,  or  even  want 
to  shake  themselves  free,  from  the  strong  grip  of  the  manufactur- 
ing and  commercial  classes.  Such  an  honest  philanthropist  as  John 
Bright  was  blinded  by  prejudice  to  the  advantages  which  the  coun- 
try at  large  might  gain  from  better  factory  legislation,  shorter  hours, 
and  higher  wages,  all  of  which  he  insisted  upon  treating  as  an  in- 
terference with  individual  liberty.  Then,  too,  party  tactics  and  the 
Irish  question  played  the  same  role  in  drawing  the  attention  of 
the  Liberals  away  from  immediate  social  legislation  as  imperialism 
had  in  the  case  of  the  Conservatives.  Of  course,  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  thoroughgoing  democrat,  the  labours  of  the  Gladston- 
ian  Liberals  in  behalf  of  Ireland  deserved  high  praise  :  it  was  an 
attack  upon  privilege  to  disestablish  the  Anglican  Church  in  that 
island  and  to  seek  to  destroy  the  land  monopoly  ;  to  espouse  Home  ; 
Rule  was  in  the  interest  of  representative  and  responsible  govern- 
ment. But  only  a  beginning  was  made  in  dealing  with  the  Irish 
problem,  and  its  most  obvious  result  in  Great  Britain  was  the 
disruption  of  the  Liberal  party,  a  considerable  group  of  Liberal 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  II 

Unionists  following  Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain  into  the  Conservative 
party,  which  had  opposed  the  Irish  reforms  even  more  naturally 
than  it  had  advocated  imperialism. 

A  period  of  almost  complete  stagnation,  so  far  as  social  legisla- 
tion was  concerned,  followed  the  Unionist  victory  of  1895;.  The 
new  government  gladly  turned  to  imperialism  once  more,  but  the 
conduct  and  hnal  outcome  of  the  Boer  War  were  not  such  as  to 
enhance  their  reputation.  An  important  group  of  the  Conservative 
party  which  gradually  gathered  about  Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain  in 
his  advocacy  of  a  close  federation  of  the  self-governing  colonies 
with  the  mother-country,  urged  with  him,  as  a  means  to  that  end, 
and  in  order  to  promote  the  national  welfare,  a  complete  revolution 
in  the  fiscal  arrangements  of  the  state,  involving  the  abandonment 
of  free  trade  and  the  adoption  of  a  frankly  protective  tariff,  with 
special  provisions  for  a  system  of  preferential  tariffs  within  the 
empire.  The  earnest  opposition  or  quiet  indifference  of  Lord 
Lansdowne,  Mr.  Balfour,  and  other  influential  Conservatives  to 
protectionism,  tended  to  create  dissensions  within  the  party ;  and 
as  long  as  the  general  financial  policy  of  the  government  was  un- 
certain, it  was  impossible  to  satisfy  the  business  interests  of  the 
country  or  to  provide  any  large  surplus  to  utilise  in  radical  social 
reforms.  Mr.  Chamberlain,  certainly,  preached  social  reform  in 
-season  and  out  of  season,  and  although  he  succeeded  in  pledging 
the  Conservative  party  to  deal  with  the  problems  of  the  aged  and  of 
the  unemployed,  the  funds  were  never  forthcoming  to  ensure  effec- 
tive legislation.  Whether  he  grew  tired  of  being  as  one  crying  in  the 
wilderness  or  despaired  of  human  nature  or  merely  of  his  colleagues, 
it  was  Mr.  Chamberlain  who,  after  most  enthusiastic  and  repeated 
declarations  in  behalf  of  old  age  pensions,  finally  stood  aside  with 
the  somewhat  cynical  remark,  "  It  is  not  in  my  department." 

It  is  significant  that  the  fall  of  the  Unionist  government  in  1905 
and  the  beginning  of  radical  social  legislation  under  Liberal  auspices 
coincided  with  the  appearance  of  the  new  Labour  party.  Since 
1875,  when  they  were  finally  legalised,  the  trade  unions  had  been 


12  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

slowly  increasing  in  influence  and  power  and  pressing  for  political 
redress  of  their  grievances.  This  agitation,  carried  on  outside  the 
two  great  parties  and  aided  by  the  propaganda  of  the  Social  Dem-  * 
ocrats  and  the  educative  campaign  of  the  Fabian  Society,  was 
crystallised  into  the  Labour  party  directly  as  a  result  of  the  cele- 
brated legal  decision  known  as  the  Taff  Vale  Railway  Company  v. 
the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Railway  Servants,  in  which  the  court 
held  that  trade  unions  were  corporations  that  were  liable  to  costs 
and  damages  for  the  action  of  any  of  their  agents  whenever  such 
action  had  caused  loss  to  other  persons.  Representatives  of  trade 
unions  and  socialist  societies  were  at  once  assembled  in  order  to 
form  what  was  called  a  Labour  Representation  Committee,  and  at 
the  first  annual  conference,  in  February,  iQ^£^ over  forty-one  trade 
unions,  with  3  c; ^^o  members,  together  with  seven  trade  councils, 
the  Fabian  Society,  and  the  Independent  Labour  Party  (a  socialist 
oTganisation  which  Mr.  Keir  Hardie  had  founded  in  1893),  joined 
the  committee.  Thenceforth  the  movement  spread  rapidly.  At  the 
election ufTg 06,  out  of  50  Labour  Representatyn  candidates  2q 
yyere  elected,  as  well  as  11  members  of  Parliament  in  connexion 
with  the  miners'  associations,  which  were  not  then  affiliated. 
Fourteen~other~"workmeir~were  elected  either  as  Independent 
Labour  men  or  as  Liberals,  making  a  total  of  54  who  more  or 
less  represented  labour.  The  most  recent  conference  of  the  new 
party  represented  1,450,648  trade  unionists  and  the  two  socialist 
societies,  the  Independent  Labour  Party  and  the  Fabian  Society, 
while  155  trades  councils  and  local  labour  parties  were  also  affiliated, 
the  reported  total  membership  being  1,481,368. 

Next  in  significance  to  the  rise  of  the  Labour  party  was  the  in- 
cTeasing  radicalism  of  the  Liberals.  U  ndoubtUdtyTKe  secession"or 
the  Unionists,  to  which  reference  was  made  above,  while  it  tem- 
porarily weakened  the  Liberal  party  and  drove  them  from  office, 
nevertheless  in  the  long  run  consolidated  the  Gladstonian  Liberals 
and  afforded  them  a  broader  social  outlook  than  they  had  ever  had 
before.   Likewise  the  parallel  growth  of  the  Labour  party,  and  the 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  I 3 

realisation  that  there  was  an  important  public  work  to  be  done,  fired 
the  altruistic  spirit  of  many  younger  men,  such  as  "M asterman, 

'Churchill,  Lloyd  George,  and  J.  AT  Hobson,  who  entered  the  Lib- 
eral party  full  of  enthusiasm  tor  humanity  and  for  social  reform. 
Another  generation  was  to  do  a  greater  work  than  Gladstone's.  By 
1905,  the  ever-waning  prestige  of  the  Conservatives,  the  enthusi- 

^astic  organising  of  the  Labourites,  and  the  optimism  of  the  Liberals, 
all  betokened  a  revolution  in  i^ntish  politics.  Up  to  that  time  both 
Conservatives  and  Liberals,  acting  on  opportunist  principles,  had 
occasionally  allowed  collectivist  measures,  particularly  for  Ireland, 
to  pass  into  law ;  both,  more  or  less  unwittingly,  had  enlarged  the 
area  of  State  interference  and  replaced  older  individualistic  meth- 
ods by  public  action  and  safeguards.  For  a  number  of  years  after 
1905,  the  controlling  majority  set  about  purposely  to  adapt  politi- 
cal democracy  to  social  needs.  The  hour  for  major  social  politics 
had  str^ick  in  the  TTnil-pr!  Kino-Hnrrt. — 

IV 

In  the  parliamentary  session  of  1905  the  Conservative  govern- 
ment ot  Mr.  iJaltour  presented  three  important  proposals  for  .soclaj 
legislation  :  a  Trade  Unions  and  Trade  Disputes  Bill,  an  Unem- 
ployed Workmen  Bill,  and  a  Workmen's  Compensation  Bill.  The 
__first-mentioned,  which,  among  other  objects,  was  designed  to  legal- 
ise "peaceful  picketing"  in  strikes,  to  free  trade  unions  from  the 
dangers  involved  in  the  law  of  conspiracy,  and  to  protect  the 
funds  of  the  unions  against  the  dangers  opened  up  by  the  Taff 
Vale  judgment,  was  so  mutilated  in  committee  discussion,  —  even 
ministers,  particularly  Sir  Edward  Carson,  the  solicitor-general, 
voting  for  every  destructive  amendment,  —  that  in  May  at  the 
instance  of  its  promoters  the  bill  was  withdrawn.  The  collapse  of 
this  measure  undoubtedly  represented  the  mature  judgment  of  the 
Tory  majority,  but  it  could  hardly  fail  to  stultify  the  ministry  and 
to  cause  a  considerable  amount  of  irritation  among  the  classes 
whose  expectations  had  been  raised.    Nor  was  the"  ^te  of  the 


14  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

other  measures  more  advantageous  to  the  government.    The  Un- 
employed  Workmen  Bill  provided  for  setting  up  an  organisation 


for  the  assistance  of  unemployed  workmen  —  the  establishment  ot 
a  local  body  in  each  metropolitan  borough  and  a  central  body  for 
the  whole  area  of  London,  whose  duties  would  be  to  inquire  into 
the  cases  of  applicants  for  employment  and  to  divide  them  into  two 
classes  :  applicants  honestly  desirous  of  obtaining  work  but  unable 
to  do  so  from  exceptional  causes,  and  applicants  who  might  be  re- 
garded as  proper  objects  of  ordinary  Poor  Law  relief ;  but  most 
of  the  powers  conferred  by  the  measure  were  made  discretionary 
rather  than  obligatory,  and  the  bill  was  finally  enacted  with  an 
amendment  limiting  its  duration  to  three  years.  The  Workmen's 
Compensation  Bill,  an  extension  of  the  principle  of  employer's  lia- 
bility to  several  classes  of  workmen  not  enumerated  in  the  Act  of 
1897,  was  amended  out  of  any  semblance  of  its  original  form  and 
at  length  failed  completelv. 

Parliament  was  prorogued  on  August  11,  1905,  the  speech  from 
the  throne  setting  forth  a  very  meagre  record  of  successful  legis- 
lation ;  and  the  Conservative  ministry,  weakened  by  internal  dis- 
sensions and  stultified  before  the  country,  resigned  on  December  4. 
A  few  days  later.  Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman,  the  Liberal 
leader,  formed  a  cabinet  which  included  Mr.  Herbert  Asquith  as 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer ;  Sir  Robert  Reid  as  Lord  Chancel- 
lor ;  the  Earl  of  Crewe  as  Lord  President  of  the  Council ;  the 
Marquess  of  Ripon  as  Lord  Privy  Seal;  Mr.  Gladstone,  Home 
Secretary ;  Sir  Edward  Grey,  Foreign  Secretary ;  the  Earl  of 
Elgin,  Colonial  Secretary  ;  Mr.  Haldane,  War  Secretary ;  Mr.  John 
Morley,  Secretary  for  India ;  Mr.  James  Bryce,  Secretary  for  Ire- 
land ;  Mr.  John  Sinclair,  Secretary  for  Scotland ;  Lord  Tweed- 
mouth,  First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty ;  Mr.  David  Lloyd  George, 
president  of  the  Board  of  Trade ;  Mr.  John  Burns,  president  of 
the  Local  Government  Board ;  Earl  Carrington,  president  of  the 
Board  of  Agriculture ;  Mr.  Augustine  Birrell,  president  of  the 
Board  of  Education ;  and  Mr.  Sydney  Buxton,  Postmaster-General. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  I 5 

Preparations  were  already  well  under  way  for  what  proved  to 
be  the  most  exciting  and  startling  general  election  since  1880,  if 
not  since  1832.  As  early  as  May  19,  Sir  Henry  Campbell- Ban- 
nerman,  in  a  speech  before  the  Council  of  the  National  Liberal 
Federation  at  Newcastle-on-'i'yne,  had  practically  identified  his 
position  with  that  of  the  Labour  members  of  Parliament.  The 
Council  unanimously  passed  a  resolution  declaring  that  immediate 
steps  ought  to  be  taken  "  to  restore  to  workmen  the  right  of 
effective  combination  of  which  they  have  been  deprived  by  recent 
decisions  of  the  courts."  And  the  Liberal  leader  referred  to  the 
"deplorable  spectacle  "  when  the  Trade  Unions  and  Trade  Disputes 
Bill  had  been  so  mauled  and  maimed  in  committee  under  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Conservatives,  led  by  their  own  solicitor-general, 
that  the  Labour  and  Liberal  members  had  been  obliged  to  leave  the 
room.  He  also  expressed  his  sympathy  with  the  movement  for 
giving  members  of  Parliament  a  modest  stipend,  and,  speaking 
broadly,  maintained  that  there  was  no  material  difference  between 
Liberal  ideas  and  the  ideas  of  those  directly  representing  labour  in 
Parliament. 

Two  days  earlier  Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain,  from  a  different 
standpoint,  had  directed  a  Conservative  appeal  to  the  trade  union- 
ists and  workingmen  generally.  The  great  need  of  the  labouring 
classes,  he  said,  was  more  employment ;  that  was  the  object  of 
trade  unions,  and  it  was  his  object.  Tariff  reform,  and  by  that,  of 
course,  he  meant  protection,  would  provide  more  employment. 

The  Trade  Union  Congress  which  was  held  at  Hanley  in  Sep- 
tember was  attended  by  some  450  delegates,  representing  about 
a  million  and  a  half  organised  workers.  The  report  of  the  Par- 
liamentary Committee  took  notice,  among  other  matters,  of  the 
mutilation  of  the  Trade  Unions  and  Trade  Disputes  Bill  and  its 
subsequent  withdrawal  by  its  promotef-s,  and  of  the  failure  of  the 
Workmen's  Compensation  Bill,  and  in  conclusion  urged  that  the 
time  was  now  ripe  for  great  efforts  on  the  part  of  trade  unionists. 
They  found  capital,  said  the  Parliamentary  Committee,  arrayed 


l6  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

against  the  workers,  organised  as  it  had  never  been  before,  sup- 
ported by  the  immense  influence  of  an  unjust  state  of  law.  The 
first  and  foremost  need  was  for  more  Labour  men  to  be  sent  to 
Parliament.  The  president  of  the  congress,  Mr.  Sexton,  in  his 
opening  address  spoke  contemptuously  of  the  Unemployed  Work- 
men Bill  in  the  form  in  which  it  had  ultimately  become  law,  and 
avowed  the  opinion  that  the  abolition  of  private  monopoly  in  the 
land  was  the  one  way  to  solve  the  problem  of  unemployment. 
Among  the  resolutions  passed  were  declarations  in  favour  of  munic- 
ipal trading,  municipal  banking,  and  the  nationalisation  of  mines, 
railways,  and  canals.  A  resolution  deprecating  any  departure  from 
the  principles  of  free  trade  in  the  way  either  of  protection,  retalia- 
tion, or  preference,  was  carried  by  a  majority  representing  i  ,253,000 
against  23,000.  An  educational  programme  was  approved,  em- 
bracing gratuitous  education  at  all  stages,  with  maintenance  scholar- 
ships so  arranged  that  all  young  people  whose  usefulness  would  be 
enhanced  by  secondary  or  technical  or  university  education  should 
be  able  to  enjoy  it,  and  secular  education  in  all  state  schools,  — 
such  schools  to  be  administered  by  directly  elected  representatives 
of  the  people,  but  all  additional  cost  involved  in  the  proposed 
changes  to  be  borne  by  the  national  exchequer,  aided  by  the  resto- 
ration and  democratic  administration  of  valuable  misappropriated 
educational  charities  and  endowments.  In  accordance  with  another 
important  resolution  adopted  by  the  congress,  the  resources  of  the 
state  were  to  be  drawn  upon  exclusively  for  the  establishment  of  a 
system  of  universal  pensions  of  five  shillings  a  week,  to  be  enjoyed 
by  all  citizens  on  attaining  the  age  of  sixty. 

In  dislike  of  the  Tories  and  hatred  for  the  House  of  Lords,  the 
Irish  Nationalists  were  one  with  the  Labourites.  The  United  Irish 
League  of  Great  Britain,  in  a  manifesto  published  on  January  i, 
1906,  reviewed  and  denounced  the  alleged  results  of  the  "  twenty 
years  of  resolute  government  for  Ireland "  demanded  by  Lord 
Salisbury  in  1886.  During  eighteen  years  of  the  interval,  said  the 
manifesto,  the  Conservatives  had  been  in  power,  and  there  was 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  1/ 

administrative  confusion,  growing  poverty,  universal  discontent, 
and  a  decrease  of  700,000  in  the  population  of  Ireland.  Irishmen 
in  Great  Britain  were  urged  to  aid  to  their  utmost  the  discomfiture 
of  the  Unionist  coalition.  The  interests  of  Catholic  schools  would 
be  best  protected  by  increasing  the  power  and  influence  of  the 
Irish  party.  Irish  electors  were  advised  to  support  the  Labour 
candidate  if  one  were  standing  ;  if  there  was  no  Labour  candidate, 
they  were  to  vote  for  Liberals,  except  Unionist  Liberals  support- 
ing Lord  Rosebery's  policy.  No  reference  was  made  to  the  great 
Unionist  gifts  to  Ireland  —  Land  Purchase  and  Irish  Local  Gov- 
ernment —  perhaps  because  the  initiative  had  first  come  from  the 
Liberal  party. 

A  manifesto  of  the  Social  Democratic  Federation,  published  on 
the  same  day,  demanded  State  maintenance  of  children,  the  State 
organisation  of  unemployed  labour,  and  old  age  pensions  instead 
of  "  workhouse  pauperisation."    It  strongly  denounced  protection. 

The  final  results  of  the  election  of  1906  showed  378  Liberals, 
"53  ■Labourites7  and  ^^"Nationalists,  a  total  coalition  of  5;  14  sup- 
porting the  ministry,  against  131  Conservatives  and  7,^  T.ihpml 
Unionists,  a  total  of.n;6  in  opposition.  Of  the  Labour  members, 
however,  29  were  approved  by  the  Labour  Representation  Commit- 
tee and  pledged  to  sit  and  act  as  an  independent  party ;  the  other 
24  were  more  or  less  identified  with  the  Liberal  party,  making 
its  total  402.  Of  the  Nationalists,  again,  three  or  four,  including 
Mr.  William  O'Brien,  were  independent  of  the  regular  Irish  parlia- 
mentary party.  Within  the  Opposition,  according  to  the  statement 
of  the  Duke  of  Devonshire,  on  March  6,  102  were  tariff  reformers 
in  Mr.  Chamberlain's  sense,  36  followed  Mr.  Balfour's  extremely 
mild  programme  of  tariff  revision,  while  1 6  were  returned  as  Union- 
ist Free  Fooders  and  2  as  independents. .  The  Liberal  and  Labour 
majority  over  all  other  groups  combined  was  134,  and  the  predic- 
tion that  Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman's  government  would  be 
dependent  on  Nationalist  votes  was  falsified.^ 

1  Annual  Register,  1906,  p.  12, 


l8  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

The  territorial  distribution  of  parties  also  calls  for  some  remark. 
The  Unionist  strongholds  were  in  Birmingham  and  its  neighbour- 
hood, in  the  better-class  residential  districts  of  London  and  its 
suburbs,  in  Kent,  and,  of  course,  in  Ulster,  where  the  Protestant, 
Unionist  "garrison"  struggled  successfully  against  the  Nationalists. 
The  universities,  which  still  ranked  as  parliamentary  constituen- 
cies, were  uniformly  Unionist.  Labour  members  were  numerous 
in  Lancashire  and  Yorkshire,  and  came  from  most  of  the  regions 
where  the  population  was  predominantly  industrial.  Wales  did 
not  return  a  single  Ll^nionist,  and  Scotland  again  became  predom- 
inantly Liberal. 

In  1906,  at  the  opening  of  the  new  Parliament,  with  its  im- 
mense  majority  in  favour  of  liberal,  radical,  and  progressive  prin- 
ciples, Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman  declared  that  underlying 
'every  proposal  of  his  governrnent  would  be  a  policy  of  social  rP'^^n- 
struction  looking  toward  a  greater  equalisation  of  wealth,  and  the 
destruction  of  the  oppressive  monopolies  of  the  land  and  of  liquor. 
Mr.  Asquith,  who  succeeded  him  in  1908  in  the  leadership  of  the 
ral  party  and  in  the  premiership,  <;tai-pH  that-  thp  inj 


the  existing  social  system  rendered  a  popular  attack  upon  if  in- 
evitable. '  Property,"  said  he,  "  must  be  associated,  in  the  mind 
of  the  masses  of  the  people,  with  the  ideas  of  reason  and  justice." 
Notwithstanding  the  overwhelming  popular  majority  of  the 
Liberals  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  the  determination  of 
their  leaders  to  effect  social  legislation  along  radical  lines,  a 
hereditary  Tory  majority  dominated  the  House  of  Lords,  quite 
as  overwhelming  in  numbers  and  quite  as  determined  to  thwart 
any  attack  upon  the  existing  social  order.  The  House  of  Lords 
resolutely  came  to  the  defence  of  all  the  interests  and  privileges 
represented  by  its  members.  The  Lords  wrecked  Mr.  Birrell's 
Educationjill  because  it  appeared  to  clash  with  the  rights  of  the 
Anglican  Church.  They  vetoed  the  Licensing  Bill  because  it 
penalised  a  trade  which  had~given  active  and  unremitting  support 
to  the  Conservative  party  and  was  ably  represented  in  the  Upper 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  19 

Chamber.  Proposals  for  a  general  land  valuation  and  for  the 
abolition  of  plural  voting  were  equally  banned  by  the  Lords  as 
leading  to  "  dangerous  novelties  "  and  to  a  disregard  of  vested 
interests.  Finally,  the  Budget  of  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  with  its 
graduation  of  real  estate  duties  and  income  tax,  its  distinction 
between  earned  and  unearned  income,  and  its  licensing  duties, 
roused  all  the  forces  of  Conservatism  to  vigorous  action  ;  in  the 
forefront  were  the  Lords.  "  Old  Age  Pensions,  Trade  Boards, 
Labour  Exchanges,  Small  Holdings,  Housing  and  Town  Plan- 
ning, all  these  measures  might  have  been  overlooked,  but  the 
policy  which  places  the  control  of  industry  in  the  hands  of  the 
people  and  provides  equal  opportunities  for  self-development, 
which  asserts  the  claims  of  the  State  to  a  share  of  the  unearned 
increment,  is  a  policy  which  has  aroused  the  fiercest  opposition,' 
finally  culminating  in  the  revolt  of  the  Lords  and  an  attempt  to 
assert  their  supremacy.  The  famous  Budget  of  Mr.  Lloyd  George " 
discriminated  between  income  that  is  earned  and  income  that  is  un- 
earned." ^  The  test  was  to  be  not  so  much  what  wealth  a  man  had 
as  how  he  secured  it.  And  this  test  was  in  essence  revolutionary. 
In  following,  therefore,  the  debates  and  statutes  contained  in  this 
volume  it  is  well  to  bear  in  mind  not  only  the  great,  governing 
^Inciples  of  the  Liberal-Labourite  coalition,  but  the  theories  and 
tactics  that  from  time  to  time  handicapped  or  obstm rtpH  i-hpm. 
TlTe"gfave~¥ocTaI  problem  has  been  complicated  at  every  turn  by  a 
serious  political  and  constitutional  problem.  And  although  the  two 
general  elections  of  19 10  —  the  first  on  the  question  of  the  Budget, 
and  the  second  on  that  of  restricting  the  powers  of  the  House  of 
Lords  —  reduced  the  Liberal  majority  in  the  Commons  to  such  a 
degree  that  the  ministry  became  dependent  upon  the  Nationalist,  as 
well  as  upon  the  Labour,  group  for  support,  nevertheless  every 


session  of  Parliament  since  1905  has  been  marked  by  an  ever- 
incfeasing  experimenlaLion  in  social  pulilics,  an  ever-growmg  record 
ot  significant  achievement  in  political  democracy  and  social  reform. 

1  Percy  Alden,  Democratic  England,  p.  7. 


CHAPTER  I 

WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION 

[On  March  26,  1906,  Mr.  Herbert  J.  Gladstone,  as  Home 
Secretary,  introduced  in  the  House  of  Commons  the  Govern- 
ment's bill  for  workmen's  compensation  in  case  of  accident.  His 
speech,  given  below  (^Extract  i),  reviews  the  measures  which  had 
been  enacted  along  similar  lines  in  1880,  1897,  and  1900,  but 
studiously  avoids  any  mention  of  the  failure  of  the  Conserva- 
tive measures  of  i905.'^  The  statement  of  Mr.  Akers-Douglas 
{Extract  2)  represents  the  favourable  attitude  of  the  Opposition, 
and  that  of  Mr.  G.  N.  Barnes  {Extract  j),  the  position  of  the 
Labour  party  on  the  question.  Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain,  whose 
speech  (Extract  4)  practically  closed  debate  on  first  reading  of  the 
Bill,  showed  himself  quite  willing  to  go  much  further  than  the 
Liberal  Government  in  legislating  on  the  matter. 

The  Bill  came  up  for  second  reading  in  the  Commons  on 
April  4.  Sir  Charles  Dilke,  the  ardent  Liberal,  in  moving  an 
amendment  demanding  a  recognition  and  guarantee  of  insurance 
sufficient  to  prevent  the  defeat  of  the  legal  expectation  of  com- 
pensation created  under  the  law,  called  attention  {Extract  j)  to 
foreign  experience  and  raised  the  fundamental  issue  of  compulsory 
workmen's  insurance.  Mr.  Gladstone,  in  reply,  doubted  whether 
any  European  country  had  really  solved  the  problem,  and  pointed 
out  the  need  of  inquiry  before  preparing  a  scheme  for  Great 
Britain.  In  the  course  of  the  important  debate  on  second  reading 
the  employer's  point  of  view  was  ably  presented  by  Mr.  Mont- 
gomery,   Conservative    member   for    Somersetshire    {Extract  6), 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  14. 
20 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  21 

and  that  of  the  employed  by  Mr.  Clynes,  Labour  member  for 
Manchester  {Extract  f). 

On  December  4  the  Commons  took  up  the  Report  stage  of 
the  Bill  as  amended  by  the  Standing  Committee,  which  had  been 
begun  on  November  29.  Insurance  by  small  employers  had 
been  facilitated,  and,  by  way  of  a  compromise  with  the  Labour 
members,  workmen  or  their  representatives  were  enabled  to  claim 
compensation  for  injuries  resulting  in  death  or  disablement,  even 
if  attributable  to  their  own  misconduct.  On  December  5  a  com- 
promise was  effected  as  to  compensation  for  industrial  diseases. 
Six  such  diseases  were  scheduled,  but  Mr.  C.  F.  G.  Masterman 
proposed  an  amendment  tending  to  include  within  the  operation 
of  the  clause  sufferers  from  any  disease  incidental  to  their 
employment,  on  which  Mr.  J.  C.  Wedgewood,  another  Liberal, 
remarked  that  no  disease  but  delirium  treinens  would  be  ex- 
cluded. Ultimately  an  amendment  giving  power  to  the  Home 
Secretary  to  extend  the  list  of  scheduled  diseases  was  carried  by 
281  to  47.  An  amendment  moved  by  Mr.  Marks,  Conservative 
member  for  Thanet,  in  Kent,  extending  the  Act  to  domestic  ser- 
vants, was  resisted  by  the  Home  Secretary,  but  supported  from 
both  sides  of  the  House,  and  eventually  this  far-reaching  change 
was  accepted  by  the  Prime  Minister.  This  was  a  singularly  profit- 
able move  both  for  the  mover  and  for  his  party.  Next  day  the 
Home  Secretary  proposed  to  empower  aged  or  infirm  workmen 
to  contract  with  their  employers  for  compensation  below  the 
ordinary  rate,  the  object  being  to  make  it  easier  for  such  men 
to  obtain  employment.  The  Labour  members  protested,  the  Gov- 
ernment left  the  amendment  an  open  question,  and  it  was  rejected 
by  211  to  133. 

The  Bill  passed  third  reading  in  the  Commons,  without  division, 
on  December  13,  1906,  accompanied  by  the  speech  of  the  Home 
Secretary,  foreshadowing  a  general  scheme  of  national  insurance 
{Extract  8),  and  the  supporting  speech  of  Mr.  Joseph  Walton 
{Extract  g). 


22  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

The  progress  of  the  Bill  through  the  House  of  Lords  from 
December  13  to  19  was  uneventful,  as  the  support  afforded  it 
by  the  Unionists  removed  it  from  the  field  of  partisan  politics ; 
and  it  received  the  royal  assent  on  December  21. 

Extract  10  is  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act  as  thus  finally 
promulgated  in  1906.  Extract  11  is  an  amendatory  measure 
enacted  in  1909  in  order  to  bring  the  principal  Act  into  harmony 
with  a  treaty  negotiated  between  the  two  great  industrial  coun- 
tries of  Great  Britain  and  France,  and  is  illustrative  of  the  inter- 
national character  of  the  labour  problem  as  well  as  suggestive  of 
possibilities  for  international  solutions.] 


Extract  i 

THE   HOME    SECRETARY   ON  WORKMEN'S   COMPENSATION 

{Air.  Herbert  J.  Gladstone^  Secretary  for  the  Home  Departrne/it, 
Co)innons^  March  26^  igo6) 

Mr.  Gladstone  •':...  Up  to  1880  there  was  the  common  law 
for  the  benefit  of  the  workman,  and  in  that  year  it  was  reinforced 
by  the  Employers'  Liability  Act,  which  continued  in  operation,  with 
all  the  disadvantages  attending  the  legal  distinctions  of  negligence 
and  common  employment,  until  1897,  when  a  totally  new  depart- 
ure was  made  with  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act,  founded  on 
the  doctrine  laid  down  by  the  right  hon.  Gentleman,  the  Member 
for  West  Birmingham  [Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain],  that,  when  a  per- 
son on  his  own  responsibility  sets  in  motion  an  agency  that  creates 
risks  for  others,  he  ought  to  be  similarly  responsible  for  what  he 
does.  The  acceptance  of  the  liability  of  employers  was  made  sub- 
ject in  1897  to  two  considerations  :  first,  the  right  of  compensation 
was  limited  to  the  most  dangerous  employments ;  and  secondly, 
the  liability  was  limited  to  those  employers  who  could  either  afford 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  154,  col.  SS6  sqq. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  23 

to  pay  directly  or  through  insurance  against  the  risk.  Then  in  1900 
the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act  of  that  year  was  extended  to 
agricultural  labourers  and  gardeners.  In  that  Act  two  of  the  main 
principles  of  the  Act  of  1897  were  abandoned,  because  it  was  made 
to  include  two  employments  which  are  among  the  safest  in  the 
country ;  and  in  the  second  place,  it  included  employment  which 
exposed  small  farmers  to  very  considerable  risks  on  the  ground 
that  they  would  not  be  able  to  pay  heavy  compensation  in  case  of 
serious  injury  to  a  workman,  and  might  not  insure,  because  the 
premium  on  insurance  was  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  risk. 

The  Government  now  think  that  the  time  has  arrived  for  a  wide 
extension  of  the  Act  of  1897  to  every  class  of  labour,  and  in  the 
Bill  a  new  principle  is  adopted  which  differentiates  it  from  the  Act 
of  1897.  That  Act  excluded  all  classes  of  workmen  who  were  not 
directly  and  expressly  included  ;  and  it  is  now  proposed  to  reverse 
this,  and,  subject  to  the  definition  of  a  workman  in  the  Bill,  all  will 
be  included  who  are  not  expressly  excluded.  The  definition  is  im- 
portant, as  it  is  really  a  governing  factor  in  the  Bill.  A  workman 
includes  any  person  not  a  police-constable,  clerk,  shop  assistant, 
outworker,  domestic  servant,  or  a  member  of  the  employer's  fam- 
ily dwelling  in  his  house  who  works  under  contract  for  wages  or 
serves  under  apprenticeship  by  way  of  manual  labour  or  otherwise, 
and  whether  the  contract  is  expressed  or  implied,  oral  or  in  writ- 
ing. Under  that  definition  certain  classes  of  the  community  are 
excluded  ;  but  the  House  will  observe  that  workmen  employed  in. 
workshops,  in  transport  service,  fishermen,  postmen,  and  seamen 
will  be  brought  within  the  operation  of  the  Act.  With  regard  to 
seamen,  the  Committee  which  considered  the  subject  two  years  ago 
recommended  that  their  case  should  be  dealt  with  under  Section 
207  of  the  Merchant  Shipping  Act,  and  hon.  Members  will  know 
that  under  that  Act  provision  was  made  for  seamen  injured  during 
the  voyage,  but  after  landing  they  had  to  take  their  chance.  The 
Government  consider  that  the  best  and  simplest  plan  would  be 
to  bring  them  under  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act,  and  we 


24  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

propose,  therefore,  to  deal  with  them  in  opposition  to  the  proposal 
of  the  Committee.  When  a  seaman  lands  after  a  voyage  during 
which  he  has  been  partially  or  totally  incapacitated,  he  will  be  able 
to  claim  under  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act. 

The  difficulty  of  small  employers  which  considerably  hampered 
Parliament  in  1897  is  still  with  us.  There  are  a  number  of  small 
workshops  throughout  the  country  and  a  number  of  small  employ- 
ments in  which  an  employer  is  practically  a  workman  himself  ;  and, 
as  hon.  Members  know,  it  is  the  small  employer  who,  as  a  rule, 
neglects  to  insure  and  in  case  of  serious  injury  is  unable  to  pay 
very  heavy  compensation.  According  to  the  evidence  given  before 
the  Committee,  25  per  cent  of  the  employers  in  the  building  trade 
do  not  insure  at  all,  and  probably  the  greater  proportion  of  that 

25  per  cent  consist  of  small  employers.  It  does  not  always 
happen  that  small  employers  do  not  insure,  for  the  report  of  the 
Committee  mentioned  stevedores  as  an  important  exception,  who, 
though  they  paid  a  high  premium,  did  as  a  rule  insure.  But,  put- 
ting aside  exceptions,  small  employers  prefer  to  take  the  risk  of 
accidents  rather  than  to  pay  the  minimum  premium  out  of  all  pro- 
portion to  the  risks  in  their  particular  trades.  The  Committee 
spent  a  good  deal  of  time  on  this  question  and  pointed  out  that 
the  successful  working  of  the  Act  of  1897  was  largely  due  to  the 
organisation  of  the  system  of  mutual  insurance  agencies  and  the 
action  of  the  larger  trade  unions.  When  there  was  organised  co- 
operation, the  Act  of  1897  had  worked  extremely  well.  But  the 
Committee  went  on  to  point  out  that  in  industries  where  employ- 
ers and  workmen  were  not  organised  it  was  doubtful  if  the  same 
results  could  be  achieved,  and  it  was  difficult  to  say  how  far  small 
employers  would  insure.  It  is  dangerous  to  concede  by  law  a  right 
which  in  many  cases  will  prove  to  be  illusory ;  and  for  that  reason 
we  propose  that  employers  whose  workmen  do  not  exceed  five  in 
number  shall  not  come  under  the  operations  of  the  Act.  That  lim- 
itation does  not  apply  to  agriculture, — the  clause  relating  to  agricul- 
ture provides  that  the  test  shall  be  one  permanent  workman,  —  and 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  25 

there  are  some  other  exceptions.  Under  this  limitation  there  will 
no  doubt  be  hardships  and  anomalies,  but  this  Bill  is  not  and  can- 
not be  final.  There  is  no  reason  why  different  classes  of  work- 
people, such  as  shop  assistants  and  clerks,  should  be  excluded 
from  the  Bill,  but  in  certain  cases  small  employers  would  have  to 
pay  a  premium  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  risk  in  their  particular 
trade,  and  for  that  reason  a  large  number  would  not  insure  at  all. 
Then,  if  there  were  an  accident,  the  employee  would  not  have  a 
substantial  man  to  proceed  against,  and  the  employer  probably 
would  be  ruined.  The  ultimate  solution  of  the  whole  question  is 
probably  to  be  found  in  a  scheme  of  compulsory  insurance.  When 
we  have  seen  how  this  Bill  works,  fresh  proposals  might  be  made 
to  make  up  proved  deficiencies,  to  extend  it  to  other  classes,  and 
to  get  rid  of  limitations ;  and  some  plan  of  cheap  and  easy  insur- 
ance on  a  small  scale  through  the  medium  of  the  Post  Office  might 
be  possible.  But  we  have  not  reached  that  point  yet.  There  is 
one  important  limitation  to  the  exclusion  of  workmen  under  the 
limit  of  five.  It  is  provided  that  if  the  accident  to  a  workman  com- 
ing under  the  definition  is  attributable  to  the  use  by  the  employer 
of  machinery  driven  by  steam,  water,  or  other  mechanical  power, 
or  if  the  workman  at  the  time  of  the  accident  was  employed  in 
the  care  or  management  of  horses,  mining,  quarrying,  or  building 
operations,  or  in  laying  or  repairing  any  electric  line  or  works,  the 
limit  of  five  shall  not  apply  in  the  case  of  such  workman.  The 
House  will  see  that  that  is  an  important  limitation  of  the  exclusion, 
and  I  think  it  will  agree  that  it  is  a  valuable  and  practical  applica- 
tion of  the  principle  of  workmen's  compensation  to  cases  which  most 
require  it,  and  which  otherwise  would  be  cut  out  by  the  limitation. 
I  have  now  dealt  with  the  basis  and  scope  of  the  Bill.  One  inci- 
dental advantage  of  the  new  form  will  be  that  our  old  friend,  the 
"  undertaker,"  will  go  out  of  workmen's  compensation,  and  we  get 
rid  of  the  definition  of  included  trades  which  has  been  so  fruitful 
of  litigation  under  the  Act.  Most  of  the  proposals  in  this  Bill  are 
based  wholly  or  in  part  on  the  valuable  recommendations  of  the 


26  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Departmental  Committee  over  which  Sir  Kenelm  Digby  presided. 
In  the  first  place,  we  propose  to  extend  workmen's  compensation 
to  industrial  diseases.  That  involves  a  new  departure.  Of  all  the 
casualties  to  which  the  industrial  army  is  unfortunately  liable,  those 
arising  from  disease  are  the  most  pitiable  and  disastrous.  The 
Committee  did  not  recommend  that  industrial  diseases  should  be 
included  in  the  Bill,  but  the  Government  thought  the  case  was 
so  strong  that,  although  the  difficulties  were  great,  a  strong  effort 
ought  to  be  made  to  surmount  them.  Therefore,  we  propose  to 
include  in  the  Bill  the  following  diseases :  anthrax,  lead  poison- 
ing, mercury  poisoning,  phosphorus  poisoning,  arsenic  poisoning, 
and  ankylostomiasis.  The  clause  which  deals  with  this  question 
contains  the  following  general  provision :  Where  a  workman  is 
certified  to  be  suffering  from  disease,  and  thereby  partially  or 
totally  disabled  from  earning  full  wages,  and  his  disease  is  due  to 
the  nature  of  the  employment  on  which  he  has  been  engaged  dur- 
ing the  previous  twelve  months,  he  is  to  be  entitled  to  compensa- 
tion, the  compensation  to  be  recovered  from  the  employer  who  last 
employed  him.  But  if  the  employer  proves  that  the  disease  was, 
in  fact,  contracted  or  developed  while  the  workman  was  in  the 
service  of  another  employer,  or  other  employers,  there  is  to  be  pro- 
portionate and  collective  responsibility.  In  these  cases  the  limit  of 
five  is  not  applicable,  and  the  Secretary  of  State  is  given  powers 
by  Provisional  Order  to  extend  this  provision  to  other  diseases. 

We  have  given  effect  to  the  Committee's  recommendations  in 
respect  of  subcontracts,  and  the  law  will  be  amended  to  give  the 
workman  security  for  the  recovery  of  compensation,  the  principal 
not  to  be  liable,  however,  for  accidents  on  premises  which  are  not 
under  his  control  or  management.  With  regard  to  the  payment 
of  compensation,  this  is  not  made  under  the  existing  law  until  a 
fortnight  has  elapsed  from  the  time  of  the  accident.  The  Commit- 
tee think  that  any  interference  with  this  provision  of  the  law  would 
involve  a  grave  departure  from  the  system  of  1897.  The  Govern- 
ment have  given  serious  consideration  to  this  matter,  knowing  full 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  2/ 

well  that  there  is  a  strong  objection  to  any  interference  with  the 
law  as  it  stands.  We  have  considered  the  case  of  industries  which 
are  alleged  already  to  be  hampered  by  the  cost  of  the  Acts.  The 
Committee  found  that  hitherto  the  pecuniary  burden  imposed  by 
the  Acts  upon  the  employers  has  not  been  excessive.  On  the  other 
hand,  we  have  to  remember  that  the  employers  have  not  yet  come 
to  the  point  when  compensation  under  the  Act  of  1897  will  reach 
its  highest  level,  after  which  it  will  probably  go  down  to  a  certain 
extent.  But  since  1897,  taking  into  account  all  available  experi- 
ence, the  Government  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  trade  has 
not  been  hampered  by  the  Act  sufificiently  to  prevent  what  they 
considered  a  further  measure  of  justice.  There  was  ample  evidence 
given  to  the  Committee  that  large  masses  of  men,  women,  and 
children  whose  weekly  earnings  amounted  to  something  between 
5s.  and  25s.  a  week  are  put  to  the  most  serious  hardship  by  the 
operation  of  the  law  as  it  stands.  Wc  have  therefore  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  two  weeks  shall  be  reduced  to  one.  That  is 
the  proposal  in  the  Bill.  Of  course,  it  will  put  a  certain  increased 
cost  upon  the  employer.  The  cost  has  been  variously  estimated 
by  experts  before  the  Committee  at  from  25  per  cent  up  to  50  per 
cent.  I  will  not  at  this  moment  hazard  an  opinion  as  to  the  inci- 
dence of  that  increased  cost.  A  small  proportion  possibly  may  fall 
upon  wages,  but  it  will  probably  be  distributed  between  the  pro- 
prietor and  the  customer  —  at  any  rate,  it  will  be  distributed  upon 
the  resources  of  the  trade  without,  as  we  think,  doing  any  injury 
at  all  to  the  trade,  and  it  is  a  measure  of  justice  which  we  cannot 
leave  out  of  this  Bill. 

Under  the  present  law  compensation  is  based  on  the  wages  re- 
ceived or  agreed  to  be  paid  while  the  workman  is  in  the  service  of 
the  same  employer.  But  the  effect  of  the  law  as  it  stands  imposes 
a  great  hardship  on  some  classes  of  workmen,  especially  on  those 
engaged  in  casual  labour.  The  Committee  have  given  instances 
of  hardship  which  occur  under  the  present  law.  A  man  earning 
from  6s.  to  7s.  a  day  may  be  awarded  3s.  6d.  a  week.    A  case  was 


28  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

given  in  which  a  man  went  on  for  a  night's  worl<:  and,  being  in- 
jured, received  only  2S.  a  week.  Another  more  extreme  case  was 
that  of  a  man  who  in  five  days  earned  30s.  and  then  went  on  to  a 
fresh  job  and  was  injured  in  the  first  hour,  and  his  compensation 
was  reckoned  out' at  3 id.  per  week.  It  is  quite  obvious  that  there 
are  great  anomalies  under  the  law  as  it  stands  which  must  be  re- 
moved. Therefore,  in  the  Bill,  the  Government  have  adopted  the 
recommendation  of  the  Committee,  which  is  founded,  virtually, 
upon  the  Employers'  Liability  Act  standard.  If  a  man  has  worked 
with  an  employer  for  two  continuous  weeks  or  more,  then  his 
compensation,  when  he  is  injured,  will  be  founded  on  the  wages  he 
is  receiving  in  that  employment,  but  if  he  has  not  worked  for  two 
continuous  weeks,  then  the  court  must  have  regard  to  the  earn- 
ings which  such  workman  would  receive  in  the  same  trade,  in  the 
same  employment,  and  in  the  same  district.  In  regard  to  the  re- 
assessment for  partial  incapacity,  the  proposal  of  the  Bill  is  that  the 
weekly  payment  is  not  to  exceed  one  half  the  difference  between 
the  amount  of  the  average  weekly  earnings  before  the  accident 
and  the  amount  which  the  workman  is  earning  or  is  fit  to  earn. 
That  is  to  say,  if  a  man  who  is  earning  £2  a  week  is  injured  and 
is  awarded  compensation  at  the  rate  oi  £\  z.  week,  but  on  the 
reassessment  is  found  capable  of  earning  £\  a  week,  he  will 
get  I  OS.  a  week  compensation,  so  that  he  will  be  in  a  position 
to  earn  30s.  a  week.  There  is  power  under  the  Bill  to  commute 
weekly  payments  which  continued  for  not  less  than  six  months 
for  a  lump  sum  not  exceeding  ^500. 

With  regard  to  the  question  of  aged  persons  and  minors,  the 
Committee  find  that  the  Acts  have  largely  increased  the  difficul- 
ties of  old  men  finding  and  retaining  employment,  and  the  difficulty 
is  believed  to  be  growing.  They  came  practically  to  the  same 
conclusion  with  regard  to  infirm  and  maimed  persons,  and  they 
proposed  that  a  lower  rate  of  compensation  should  be  payable  in 
regard  to  both  these  classes.  The  two  cases  of  the  aged  person 
and  the  infirm  and  maimed  person  appear  to  the  Government  to  be 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  29 

governed  by  somewhat  different  considerations.  I  confess  that  per- 
sonally I  am  somewhat  inclined  to  extend  to  both  classes  the  pro- 
posals of  the  Committee,  but  the  difficulties  are  undoubtedly  rather 
more  serious  in  the  case  of  the  infirm  and  maimed  person.  Other 
considerations  arise  which  I  will  not  mention  now,  and  so,  on  the 
whole,  the  Government  have  decided  only  to  deal  with  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  Committee  in  its  application  to  the  aged  person. 
After  the  age  of  sixty  the  employer  is  enabled  to  make  special 
arrangements  with  the  aged  person,  under  which,  in  case  of  death, 
a  maximum  payment  of  ;^2c^  is  payable  and,  in  the  case  of  injury 
and  incapacity,  weekly  compensation  with  a  maximum  of  los.  a 
week.  The  Committee  suggested  5  s.  The  Government  think  that 
is  too  small  an  amount,  and  they,  therefore,  extend  it  to  los.  In 
the  case  of  minors,  again,  very  great  hardships  have  arisen  under 
the  present  law.  A  boy,  for  example,  receiving  4s.  a  week,  who  is 
injured  and  incapacitated  for  life,  cannot  get  more  than  2s.  a  week 
compensation.  The  Bill  provides  that,  where  a  minor  is  injured 
who  earns  less  than  20s.  a  week,  100  per  cent  should  be  substi- 
tuted for  50  per  cent  in  respect  of  compensation  based  on  his 
weekly  earnings,  but  the  weekly  payment  is  not  to  exceed  los.  a 
week.  If  the  case  is  reviewed  within  twelve  months  or  more  after 
the  accident,  the  amount  of  the  weekly  payment  may  be  increased 
to  any  amount  not  exceeding  50  per  cent  of  the  weekly  sum  which 
the  workman  would  probably  have  been  earning  at  the  date  of  the 
review  if  he  had  remained  uninjured,  but  not  in  any  case  more  than 
;^i  a  week.  The  Bill  authorises  the  payment  into  court  by  the 
employer  of  a  lump  sum  in  case  of  a  fatal  accident  where  depend- 
ants are  left,  to  be  invested  at  the  discretion  of  the  registrar.  The 
Bill  also  deals  with  the  case  of  widows,  and  provision  is  made, 
where  there  is  evidence  before  the  court  that  a  widow  who  obtained 
compensation  under  the  Act  was  prone  to  misconduct,  for  the 
court  to  apply  the  whole  or  part  of  the  compensation,  which 
otherwise  would  accrue  to  the  widow,  for  the  benefit  of  the 
other  dependants. 


30  BRITISH   SOCIAL  TOLITICS       • 

I  now  come  to  the  question  of  medical  referees.  As  the  law  now 
stands,  when  there  is  an  accident  and  a  workman  is  injured,  he 
has  to  submit  himself  to  the  employer's  doctor,  who  reports  to  the 
employer.  If  there  is  disagreement,  then  there  is  no  remedy  but 
proceedings  in  the  courts.  If  proceedings  are  taken  under  the  Em- 
ployers' Liability  Act,  medical  evidence  is  taken,  but  it  is  not  com- 
petent to  bring  a  medical  referee  into  court ;  but  if  they  are  taken 
under  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act,  after  hearing  the  medical 
evidence,  a  medical  referee  may  be  appointed,  and  his  judgment 
is  final.  But  that  leads  to  considerable  delay  and  cost,  and  so  under 
the  Bill  it  is  provided  that  if  there  is  no  agreement  after  injury 
between  the  employer  and  the  workman,  on  the  report  of  the  em- 
ployer's doctor,  the  employer  or  the  workman,  on  payment  of  a 
fee,  can  apply  to  the  court,  and  the  registrar  may  at  once  appoint 
a  medical  referee,  whose  judgment  will  be  final.  And  in  case  of 
review,  either  party  in  the  same  way  can  apply  to  the  court,  and 
the  registrar  will  appoint  a  referee,  whose  judgment  will  be  final. 
The  Government  hope  that  that  provision  will  save  a  good  deal 
of  unnecessary  cost  and  delay.  Provision  is  also  taken  in  the  Bill 
that  the  Secretary  of  State  may,  with  the  sanction  of  the  Treasury, 
appoint  medical  men  to  be  referees  under  the  Act,  and,  subject  to 
Treasury  regulations,  remuneration  and  expenses  may  be  paid  to 
them  out  of  public  money. 

There  are  various  other  minor  points  of  detail,  the  consideration 
of  which  I  propose  to  leave  to  another  stage.  The  Government 
are  aware  that  the  change  in  the  basis  of  the  Act  will  bring  out 
new  conditions  and  new  points,  and  they  will  welcome  suggestions. 
They  will  have  the  benefit  of  the  criticism  and  information  of  the 
House,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  Bill  in  its  passage  through 
the  House  will  be  greatly  improved  and  strengthened. 

There  is  one  important  consideration  on  which  I  should  like  to 
touch,  and  that  is  the  question  of  safety  under  the  Workmen's 
Compensation  Act.    It  was  feared  in  1897  that  the  adoption  of 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  3 1 

the  new  principle  would  lead  to  more  accidents.  It  is  maintained  by 
the  Government,  on  the  other  hand,  that  the  contrary  result  will 
probably  ensue.  The  Committee  find  no  evidence  of  any  great 
improvement  in  the  direction  of  safety  to  be  placed  to  the  credit 
of  the  Act,  and  their  conclusion  on  the  matter  has  reference  to  an 
important  point  which  was  raised  in  the  evidence  of  Commander 
Smith  with  regard  to  the  power  of  the  court,  under  the  Act  of 
1897,  to  set  any  fines  imposed  under  the  Factory  and  Workshop 
Act  against  the  compensation  due  to  the  workman,  and  that  that 
provision  removed  the  Act  from  any  penal  operation.  The  Com- 
mittee propose  that  that  particular  part  of  the  clause  should  be  re- 
pealed, and  the  Government  have  adopted  that  recommendation. 
The  Committee  say :  "  On  the  whole  we  feel  unable  to  come  to 
the  conclusion  that  the  operation  of  the  Compensation  Act  of  1897 
has  had  any  marked  or  ascertainable  effect,  one  way  or  the  other, 
upon  the  safety  of  the  "workman." 

Therefore,  in  considering  this  question  anew,  we  must  not  flatter 
ourselves  that  by  providing  compensation  we  provide  increased  se- 
curity for  the  workman.  In  my  judgment  that  increased  security 
will  have  to  be  found  in  the  operation  of  other  Acts,  and  more 
particularly,  of  course,  in  the  operations  of  the  Factory  and  Work- 
shop Act  and  the  Mines  Regulation  Act. 

There  is  one  further  point  which  I  think  will  give  general  satis- 
faction. The  Bill  which  I  propose  to  introduce  is  in  the  form  of 
a  consolidating  Act,  incorporating  the  Acts  of  1897  and  1900,  so 
that  the  House  will  have  plainly  before  them,  in  more  or  less  simple 
English,  the  whole  statement  of  the  case  with  regard  to  the  com- 
pensation of  workmen  under  the  law.  In  these  circumstances  I 
venture  on  an  appeal  to  the  House.  The  Government  are  sub- 
mitting the  whole  subject  of  workmen's  compensation  and  are 
opening  it  all  up,  and  as  this  is  done  for  the  convenience  of  the 
House,  I  hope  that  questions  which  are  not  only  settled,  but  which 
are  supposed  to  be  satisfactorily  settled,  will  not  be  unnecessarily 


32  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

reopened  so  as  to  hamper  the  progress  of  the  Act.  Our  main 
object  is  to  pass  the  Bill  into  law  this  session,  and  we  offer  it  to 
the  House  in  the  hope  that  it  will  be  of  permanent  practical  benefit 
to  all  that  are  included  within  the  scope  of  its  provisions. 


Extract  2 

CONSERVATIVE   REPLY  TO  THE  HOME   SECRETARY 

{Mr.  A.  Ake7-s-Dotiglas,  Commo?is,  March  26,  igo6) 

Mr.  Akers-Douglas^:  I  am  sure  I  am  voicing  the  opinion  of  the 
whole  House  when  I  congratulate  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  upon 
the  clearness  and  ability  with  which  he  has  dealt  with  a  very  com- 
plicated subject.  We  have  all  listened  to  him  with  very  great  pleas- 
ure ;  we  have  all  felt  the  difficulty  of  his  task  and  recognised  the 
excellent  manner  in  which  he  has  discharged  it.  I  do  not  think 
there  is  any  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  object  to  be  aimed  at. 
We  all  welcome  a  Bill  to  amend  the  Act  of  1897.  We  feel  that 
an  Amendment  of  that  Act  is  very  much  wanted.  The  Act,  as  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman  has  explained,  was  a  new  procedure  in  legis- 
lation in  1897,  and  for  that  reason  it  had  to  be  to  a  certain  extent 
experimental  and  tentative,  and,  therefore,  we  need  not  be  sur- 
prised at  the  fact  that  after  working  eight  or  nine  years  it  requires 
some  considerable  amendment.  The  experience  of  those  eight  or 
nine  years,  I  think,  on  the  whole,  has  been  very  satisfactory,  but 
certainly  the  time  has  now  come  when  we  might  deal  with  many 
matters  which  require  amendment  and,  as  the  right  hon.  Gentle- 
man proposes  to  do,  very  largely  extend  the  Act  in  its  operations 
towards  the  people  who  come  under  it.  I  have  listened  very  care- 
fully to  the  speech  of  the  right  hon.  Gentleman,  and  I  gather  from 
him  that  not  only  is  the  Bill  to  be  an  amending,  but  a  consolidating, 
Bill.    I  congratulate  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  on  this  fact,  and  I 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  154,  col.  S95  sqq. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  33 

admire  his  courage  in  avoiding  the  temptation  to  legislate  by  refer- 
ence. I  know  from  the  experience  I  had  in  introducing  a  measure 
on  this  subject  last  year  the  very  great  difficulty  of  dealing  with 
it  purely  by  an  amending  Bill,  and  I  think  that  the  right  hon.  Gen- 
tleman has  taken  a  wise  and,  I  am  bound  to  say,  a  courageous 
course  in  bringing  in  the  Bill  in  the  form  he  has  done.  I  may  as- 
sure him  that,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  and  so  far  as  my  friends 
on  this  side  of  the  House  are  concerned,  we  will  accept  the  sug- 
gestion that  he  has  made  to  us  in  regard  to  not  opening  up 
unnecessary  subjects.  .  .  . 

I  have  no  doubt  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  has  taken  care  to 
consult  employers  of  labour,  especially  on  his  own  side  of  the 
House,  with  regard  to  this  extra  burden  which  he  is  placing  upon 
them.  I  am  anxious  to  give  every  reasonable  facility  to  cover 
reasonable  cases  in  the  interests  of  the  employees,  but  we  must 
not  in  our  desire  to  act  generously  to  them  either  make  the  Act 
unworkable  or  throw  unreasonable  cost  upon  industry.  The  Com- 
mittee which  sat  under  the  chairmanship  of  Sir  Kenelm  Digby 
took  a  great  deal  of  evidence  on  this  point.  As  to  the  additional 
risk  incurred  and  the  cost  of  insurance,  the  General  Accident  Com- 
pany thought  that  the  additional  premium  required  would  be  35 
per  cent  and  the  General  Insurance  thought  it  would  be  50  per 
cent.  If  the  assurance  companies  still  hold  that  these  figures  are 
correct,  we  shall  have  seriously  to  consider  whether  such  a  scheme 
would  not  throw  too  great  a  burden  on  the  employer.  I  am  most 
anxious  that  the  Act  shall  prove  successful,  and  I  hope  that  when 
the  Bill  is  in  Committee  this  question  of  burden  on  the  employers 
will  be  carefully  discussed.  I  do  not  want  to  press  it  now  or  on 
the  Second  Reading,  for  I  am  anxious  that  the  measure  should 
pass  into  law  as  quickly  as  possible ;  but  details  can  always  be 
more  usefully  considered  in  Committee  than  on  the  floor  of  the 
House.  I  am  sure  that  hon.  Members  of  the  Labour  party  below 
the  gangway  want  only  a  measure  which  will  be  fair  as  between 
man  and  man,  and  that  they  will  endeavour  by  their  criticisms  and 


34  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Amendments  to  make  it  a  workable  measure  and  one  likely  to  be 
accepted  by  all  classes  of  employers  and  employed.  Whether  the 
right  hon.  the  Home  Secretary  has  gone  too  far  or  not  in  amend- 
ing the  Act  of  1897,  or  in  extending  the  benefits  of  the  Act  to 
further  trades  — -  the  general  principle  being  admitted  —  we  must 
wait  to  see ;  but,  so  far  as  we  could  gather  from  the  speech  of  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman,  the  measure  is  satisfactory,  and  I  trust,  there- 
fore, that  the  House  will  agree  to  the  First  and  Second  Readings, 
leaving  all  these  details  to  be  considered  fully  in  Committee. 


Extract  j 

LABOUR  REPLY  TO  THE  HOME  SECRETARY 

{Mr.  G.  iW  Barnes,  Commons,  March  26,  igo6) 

Mr.  Barnes  said  ^  he  wished  to  offer  a  few  observations  on  the 
speech  of  the  right  hon.  the  Home  Secretary  and  on  the  Bill  which 
the  right  hon.  Gentleman  had  asked  leave  to  introduce  into  the 
House.  First  of  all,  on  behalf  of  the  Party  with  which  he  was 
identified,  he  welcomed  the  right  hon.  Gentleman's  statement  of 
the  projected  Bill  as  being,  to  a  large  extent  at  all  events,  satisfac- 
tory from  their  point  of  view ;  and  he  could  promise  that  it  would 
have  a  helpful  and  sympathetic  consideration  with  a  view  to  having 
it  amended  in  their  direction  and  passed  into  law.  It  seemed  to 
him  that  the  name  of  the  Bill  was  to  some  extent  a  misnomer. 
The  Bill  would  not  compensate.  It  provided  merely  for  a  main- 
tenance being  given  to  a  man  who  was  injured.  Therefore,  it 
seemed  to  the  Labour  party  that  there  should  be  some  Amend- 
ment in  the  name  of  the  Bill  which  would  more  accurately  define 
what  the  Bill  really  was.  On  the  whole,  however,  he  felt  satisfied 
that  not  only  in  its  form  but  in  its  scope,  as  indicated  in  the  speech 
of  the  right  hon.  Gentleman,  the  Bill  would  to  a  very  large  extent 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  154,  col.  900  sqq. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  35 

meet  the  wishes  of  the  Labour  party.  The  Act  of  1897  had  been 
of  inestimable  benefit  to  a  very  large  number  of  working  people 
throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  country.  With  all  its  de- 
fects and  blemishes  it  had  proved  one  of  the  best  bits  of  social 
legislation  that  had  been  put  on  the  Statute  Book  in  recent  years. 
He  wished  to  go  a  little  further  and  to  pay  a  well-merited  tribute 
of  indebtedness  to  one  who  was  largely  instrumental  in  getting  that 
Act  passed  through  Parliament.  That  right  hon.  Gentleman  long 
ago  contributed  articles  to  magazines  advocating  what  was  then  a 
novel  principle  in  English  law.  He  introduced  that  principle  as  an 
Amendment  on  the  Bill  of  1893,  and  had  it  afterwards  successfully 
embodied  in  the  Act  of  1897.  It  was  needless  to  say  that  reference 
was  made  to  the  right  hon.  Member  for  West  Birmingham  [Joseph 
Chamberlain].  He  was  all  the  more  satisfied  to  pay  that  tribute  of 
indebtedness  to  the  right  hon.  Gentleman,  for  it  was  the  vogue  to 
jump  upon  his  by  no  means  prostrate  form.  A  good  deal  had  been 
said  as  to  the  deficiencies  of  the  Act  of  1897,  but  he  believed  that 
a  great  deal  of  the  litigation  and  of  the  money  which  had  found  its 
way  into  the  lawyers'  pockets  had  been  caused  by  the  confusing 
lines  between  the  "  ins  "  and  the  "  outs."  He  remembered  the  re- 
port of  a  debate  eight  or  nine  years  ago  in  which  it  was  predicted 
by  hon.  Gentlemen  in  this  House,  especially  those  who  represented 
the  mine-owners,  that  the  Bill  would  lead  to  vast  litigation ;  and 
some  even  went  the  length  of  describing  it  as  a  "  Lawyers'  Employ- 
ment Bill."  He  had  had  a  good  deal  of  experience  in  regard  to 
the  working  of  the  Act  of  1897,  and  had  had  the  opportunity  of 
hearing  the  testimony  of  others  who  had  had  more,  and  all  he  could 
say  was  that  the  cases  which  had  been  settled  by  the  payment  of 
money  without  litigation  at  all  were  from  90  to  95  per  cent  of  the 
whole.  From  that  point  of  view  the  Bill  had  been  on  the  whole 
satisfactory ;  but  there  was  no  reason  why  the  5  or  i  o  per  cent  of 
litigation  should  not  also  be  reduced.  In  his  belief,  there  would 
be  no  complete  solution  of  the  difficulty  until  all  men,  no  matter 
what  employment  they  were  in,  were  included  in  the  scope  of  the 


36  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

measure.  It  had  been  said  that  only  dangerous  trades  were  in- 
cluded in  the  last  Act,  but  agricultural  labourers  were  afterwards 
included,  and  no  one  would  seriously  contend  that  agriculture  was 
a  dangerous  employment.  He  was  sorry  to  hear  that,  while  anyone 
employing  more  than  five  men  was  to  be  included  in  the  Bill,  all 
small  employers  having  fewer  than  five  employees  were  to  be  ex- 
cluded. That  would  be  a  fruitful  source  of  litigation  and  confusion 
which  would  benefit  the  lawyers  and  the  agents  of  the  insurance 
companies.  He  hoped  that  the  Bill  would  be  amended  in  these  re- 
spects. He  knew  many  small  workshops  where  fewer  than  five 
men  were  employed  under  the  most  dangerous  conditions  —  prob- 
ably more  dangerous  than  in  large  workshops.  But  it  would  be  no 
good  including  them  on  paper  only.  Therefore,  if  they  were  to  be 
included,  there  must  be  some  provision  whereby  the  money  should 
be  there  when  wanted.  That  carried  with  it  some  form  of  compul- 
sory insurance.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  said  that  the  time  had 
not  yet  come  for  that.  That  remained  to  be  seen.  He  was  inclined 
to  think  that  compulsory  insurance  would  even  now  be  necessary ; 
but  if  the  Bill  was  carried  further  than  its  present  scope,  he  was 
certain  that  compulsory  insurance  would  be  absolutely  necessary. 
He  knew  that  there  were  some  who  said  that  compulsory  insurance, 
or  insurance  of  any  character,  carried  with  it  increased  risk.  There 
might  be  something  in  that  argument,  but,  after  all,  the  contention 
seemed  to  him  to  be  advanced  by  those  who  strained  at  a  gnat  and 
swallowed  a  camel.  .  .  . 

Extract  4 

MR.  JOSEPH  CHAMBERLAIN  ON  WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION 

{Comnwits^  March  26,  igo6) 

Mr.  Chamberlain  ^ :  .  .  .  There  was  no  desire  to  obstruct  the 
Bill  in  any  part  of  the  House.  But,  in  regard  to  the  time  before 
the  compensation  should  commence  to  be  paid,  he  would  press  the 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  154,  col.  928  sqq. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  37 

representatives  of  the  workingmen,  both  inside  and  outside  the 
House,  to  consider  very  carefully  whether  a  provision  which  at  first 
sight  might  appear  to  be  to  the  advantage  of  the  workmen,  might 
not  ultimately  be  not  so  much  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  manu- 
facturer or  the  employer,  as  to  the  workman  himself.  They  should 
not  desire  to  press  on  the  employer  any  expenditure  which  was 
not  clearly  in  the  interest  of  the  w^orkmen,  because,— after-all, 
whatever  political  economists  might  say  on  the  subject,  thev  all 
knew  that  one  of  the  factors  in  wages  was  the  expense  of  produc- 
tion, and  if  the  expenseof  production  was  raised  beyond  certain 
limits  by  legislation,  it  was  conceivable  that  some  part  of  that 
charge  might  be  transferred  by  the  employer  on  to  the  workmen. 
Before  the  Bill  of  1897  was  introduced,  he  consulted  a  large  num- 
ber of  people  acquainted  with  the  principles  of  compensation  insur- 
ance, some  of  the  principal  officials  of  the  great  friendly  and  benefit 
societies  in  this  country,  and  representatives  of  insurance  companies. 
They  all  pressed  upon  him  that  in  the  interests  of  the  workman,  as 
well  as  of  the  employer,  a  distinct  and  definite  period  should  lapse 
before  compensation  was  payable.  The  reason  was  that,  after  all, 
there  was  no  great  pressure  for  compensation  where  the  accident 
was  so  slight  as  to  be  represented  by  no  more  than  a  fortnight's 
illness.  In  the  second  place,  it  was  found  by  some  of  the  friendly 
societies  necessary  to  protect  themselves  by  a  delay  before  com- 
pensation became  payable,  in  order  to  prevent  fraud.  He  asked 
whether  it  was  worth  while  putting  fifty  per  cent  more  expense 
upon  the  employer  in  order  merely  to  get  compensation  for  the 
first  fortnight's  absence  from  work.  He  urged  the  representatives 
of  the  workmen  to  consider  whether  it  was  in  their  interests  to 
press  for  an  alteration  in  the  law  which  would  be  found  to  be 
extremely  unpopular  and  would  place  an  increased  charge  on  em- 
ployers everywhere.  When  the  Bill  of  1897  was  before  the  House 
he  had  returns  furnished  to  him  of  the  number  of  accidents  which 
took  place  in  every  great  trade  in  the  country,  and  calculations 
were  deduced  from  these  returns  as  to  what  the  operation  of  the 


48412 


38  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Bill  would  cost.  At  the  time  he  believed  that  the  statements  made 
by  the  opponents  of  the  Bill  as  to  its  cost  were  greatly  exaggerated, 
and  that  had  been  proved  to  be  the  case,  because  after  some  years' 
experience  of  the  working  of  the  Act  it  was  found  that  his  original 
calculations  were  absolutely  correct.  He  was  informed  that  of  late 
years  there  had  been  a  considerable  increase  in  the  number  of  ac- 
cidents. Why  was  that?  [An  Hon.  Member  on  the  Labour 
Benches  :  Speeding  up  the  machinery.]  Well,  if  speeding  up 
machinery  had  taken  place,  with  the  result  of  an  increase  in  the 
number  of  accidents,  then  he  for  one  was  glad  that  means  were 
provided  for  compensation.  If  the  House  reduced  the  close  period, 
as  it  had  been  called,  to  seven  days,  he  thought  they  would  open 
the  way  to  a  great  deal  more  litigation,  and  to  that  extent  they 
would  injure  rather  than  benefit  the  working  classes. 


Extract  5 

SIR  CHARLES   DILKE  ON  WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION 

(Commons^  April  4,  jgo6) 

Sir  Charles  Dilke  ^ :  .  .  .  The  other  day  —  and  he  dared  say 
they  would  see  the  same  to-day  —  the  House  seemed  inclined  to 
bless  almost  unanimously  the  principle  of  universal  insurance,  but, 
having  done  that,  to  take  no  steps  towards  giving  it  effect.  How 
long  was  that  to  go  on  ?  It  was  no  new  question  ;  it  was  a  very 
old  question.  In  1883  Germany  adopted  her  present  law.  He  was 
not  advocating  the  adoption  of  that  law  here.  It  was  too  bound 
up  in  other  laws  for  it  to  be  practicable  here;  but  in  1883-1884 
Germany  and  Austria  called  the  attention  of  the  world  to  the 
subject,  and  they  adopted  their  law,  admirable  from  their  point  of 
view,  which  so  completely  dealt  with  the  question  for  them,  and 
which  had  received  only  unimportant  amendments  of  detail  from 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  155,  col.  523  sqq. 


WORKMKN'S   COMPENSATION  39 

that  tiiTie.  Then  the  right  hon.  Member  for  West  Birmingham 
[Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain]  brought  the  matter  before  this  House, 
not  on  the  lines  of  his  subsequent  Bill,  which  they  were  now  amend- 
ing, but  on  the  lines  of  the  Amendment.  He  moved  an  Amendment 
in  1893  to  the  Employers'  Liability  Bill,  raising  this  very  question. 
He  moved  that  no  amendment  of  the  law  could  be  satisfactory 
which  did  not  provide  compensation  for  workmen  for  all  injuries. 
He  made  only  one  exception,  and  he  stated  that  he  had  placed  his 
Amendment  upon  the  Paper  with  a  view  to  telling  the  House  an 
alternative  system  of  dealing  with  the  whole  question.  He  quoted 
a  conversation  he  had  had  with  a  well-known  former  Member, 
Mr.  Knowles,  who  had  just  died,  a  great  Tory  employer,  who  was 
of  opinion  that  universal  liability  was  the  only  satisfactory  settle- 
ment. The  right  hon.  Member  for  West  Birmingham  added  that 
universal  liability  meant  universal  insurance.  Within  the  last  few 
weeks  it  had  been  alleged  that  it  was  too  soon  to  bring  about 
so  sudden  a  change,  but  1893  was  a  good  many  years  ago,  and 
it  was  then  already  alleged  that  the  thing  was  premature.  The 
right  hon.  Member  for  West  Birmingham  asked  the  then  Liberal 
Government,  "  Why  do  you  not  take  this  opportunity  of  complet- 
ing your  work  ? "  It  was  answered  that  public  opinion  was  not 
prepared  for  so  great  a  change,  and  he  said,  "  How  do  you  know 
that  ?  It  is  the  duty  of  Government  to  lead  and  instruct  public 
opinion.  Opinion  is  making  rapid  strides  in  this  direction."  That 
was  in  1893,  and  yet  they  had  had  nothing  in  that  direction, 
although  they  raised  these  speeches  and  discussions  against  the 
right  hon.  Member  for  West  Birmingham  in  1897  and  since. 
They  were  told  that  the  Bill  of  1897  was  a  tentative  measure, 
and  it  was  suggested  that  ultimately  steps  might  be  taken  in 
their  direction. 

In  1898  France  and  Italy  both  suddenly  adopted  the  very  prin- 
ciple which  he  was  now  maintaining,  a  principle  far  ahead  of  that 
of  1897,  of  far  more  general  satisfaction  to  the  workmen,  far  more 
complete,  and  having  the  effect  of  giving  far  more  money  to  the 


40  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

working-classes  than  any  Bill  in  operation  in  this  country  or  than 
the  Bill  now  proposed.  The  late  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colo- 
nies, Mr.  Lyttelton,  following  the  right  hon.  Member  for  West  Bir- 
mingham, actually  went  so  far  as  to  suggest  that  the  Workmen's 
Compensation  Act  was  a  handicap  from  which  our  competitors 
were  free,  but  in  France  it  was  beyond  all  doubt  five  times  more 
severe  than  it  was  here.  There  could  also  be  no  doubt  that  the 
benefits  which  it  directly  conferred  upon  the  working-classes  went 
further  than  our  own.  It  was  carried  suddenly  in  Italy  and 
France,  and  it  was  a  compromise  —  such  a  compromise  as  they 
might  expect  to  get  in  this  country  —  between  those  who  insisted 
on  the  individual  liability  of  the  employer,  those  who  wanted  to 
make  the  liability  as  little  as  possible,  and  those  who  wanted  to 
make  it  a  matter  of  State  insurance.  Those  systems  had  been 
working  close  at  hand  in  Europe  satisfactorily  from  that  time 
to  this.  .  .  . 

His  own  main  point  was  this :  that  by  shutting  their  eyes  for  so 
long  a  time  and  giving  the  go-by  to  this  question,  they  were  not 
doing  what  the  country  expected  and  what  so  many  hon.  Members 
told  the  electors,  namely,  that  they  were  going  to  work  towards 
obtaining  complete  compensation  for  all  workmen  injured  in  all 
classes  of  trade.  In  this  matter  we  had  fallen  into  arrear  as  com- 
pared with  other  countries.  Workmen's  compensation  treaties 
between  France  and  Italy,  Italy  and  Switzerland,  and  Italy  and 
Germany  were  signed  in  1904.  Similar  labour  treaties  were  made 
between  Austria  and  Germany  in  1905  and  between  France  and 
Belgium  in  1906.  Up  to  the  present  this  country  had  not  been 
able  to  come  to  any  treaty  engagement  of  that  kind,  and,  therefore, 
they  were  unable  to  give  or  receive  the  advantages  which  all  those 
States  were  conferring  upon  their  workmen  abroad.  He  appealed 
to  the  Government  to  give  careful  consideration  to  this  subject  in 
regard  to  which  they  were  falling  day  by  day  more  heavily  into 
arrear.  .  .  . 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  4I 

Extract  6 

EMPLOYER'S  ATTITUDE  TOWARD  WORKMEN'S 
COMPENSATION 

(J\ir.  H.  G.  Montgomery ^  Co/nmons,  April  4^  igo6) 

Mr.  Montgomery  ^  asked  the  indulgence  of  the  House  for  a  few 
moments  while  he  put  before  them  the  point  of  view  of  the 
employer.  He  wished  to  give  employees  the  fullest  measure  of 
security,  but  at  the  same  time  the  employer  was  entitled  to  know 
what  amount  of  compensation  he  had  to  pay.  At  the  present  time 
he  did  not  know.  Unfortunately,  he  was  one  of  those  small  em- 
ployers of  labour  who,  when  the  Act  was  introduced  by  the  right 
hon.  Gentleman  the  Member  for- West  Birmingham  [Joseph  Cham- 
berlain], joined  with  others  in  forming  a  mutual  insurance  of  their 
own.  He  was  sorry  to  say  the  speculation  was  a  very  bad  one. 
They  paid  away  a  large  sum  in  the  first  place  in  endeavouring  to 
ascertain  what  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act  meant.  They 
had  to  fight  a  number  of  cases,  and  he  was  very  much  inclined  to 
think  that  the  ambiguity  of  the  Act  was  a  godsend  to  half  the 
solicitors  and  barristers  of  this  country.  They  had  to  defend  a 
number  of  claims  that  ought  never  to  have  been  brought.  There 
were  legal  gentlemen  who  sent  touts  to  the  hospital  in  which  an 
injured  man  was,  telling  him  that  if  a  claim  were  preferred  under 
the  Employers'  Liability  Act  instead  of  under  the  Workmen's 
Compensation  Act,  the  solicitor  would  be  able  to  get  a  very  much 
larger  sum.  As  very  often  happened,  the  man  was  persuaded  to 
make  a  claim  under  the  Employers'  Liability  Act.  He  knew  of  an 
instance  where  a  man  had  a  sprained  ankle,  and  they  were  willing 
to  pay  compensation  under  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act,  but 
the  tout  at  a  hospital  got  hold  of  the  man,  and  a  claim  was  made 
under  the  Employers'  Liabilit}'  Act.    In  the  end  the  jury  gave  a 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  155,  col.  54S  sqq. 


42  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

large  sum,  with  the  result  that  the  firm  had  to  pay  ;^4oo  for  a 
sprained  ankle,  whilst  the  man  was  said  to  be  dancing  a  jig  a  few 
days  after.  He  was  told  that  the  money  did  not  all  go  to  the 
workman,  but  that  it  was  divided  between  solicitor  and  client.  He 
was  not  sure  that  it  was  wise  to  give  any  workman  a  lump  sum  as 
compensation,  because  he  was  very  often  inclined  to  spend  it  in 
ways  that  he  should  not,  and  in  a  very  liberal  manner  amongst  his 
friends.  He  thought  that  the  Act  ought  to  cover  every  kind  of 
accident  that  might  possibly  arise.  He  was  in  entire  agreement 
with  the  extension  of  the  Act,  and  he  should  like  to  see  it  extended 
to  every  form  of  service,  even  to  the  domestic  who  cleaned  the 
doorstep  in  the  morning.  He  noticed  that  it  was  provided  in  the 
Bill  that  if  the  employer  could  be  proved  to  have  been  guilLyL-QjL 
negligence,  he  would  have  to  pay  a  larger  sum,  but  if  the  employee 
was  found  guilty  ot  negligence,  it  did  not  say  that  he  should  receive^ 
ajess  sum.  He  did  not  think  that  was  fair,  because  what  was 
sauce  for  the  goose  was  also  sauce  for  the  gander.  It  had  been 
proved  over  and  over  again  that  negligence  was  not  wilful  miscon- 
duct on  the  part  of  the  employee.  He  knew  a  case  where  a  man 
was  engaged  to  feed  a  brick -making  machine,  and  instead  of  putting 
the  clay  in  with  a  shovel,  as  he  ought  to  have  done,  he  used  his 
foot.  On  one  occasion  his  foot  was  caught  and  he  lost  it.  He 
received  compensation  and  also  got  a  wooden  leg.  Not  more  than 
two  months  after,  the  wooden  leg  found  its  way  into  the  machine 
as  well,  and  the  man  received  a  second  measure  of  compensation. 
They  could  proceed  against  the  employer  for  allowing  the  man  to 
put  his  leg  or  wooden  leg  into  the  machine,  but  they  should  have 
an  Act  which  would  deal  fairly  between  employer  and  employed. 
The  House  had  been  told  that  insurance  companies  did  not  make 
any  money  out  of  workmen's  compensation.  He  was  sorry  to  differ 
from  the  hon.  Member  for  the  St.  Austell  Division  [Mr.  William 
McArthur]  on  this  point,  because  he  believed  that  if  the  insurance 
■was  on  a  large  scale,  a  large  amount  of  profit  could  be  made. 
A  larger  body  of  factory  inspectors  would  be  better  able  than 


WORKMEN'S   COMPENSATION  43 

anybody  else  to  prevent  accidents.  If  the  Government  would  take 
this  question  up  as  a  business  matter  and  conduct  it  on  business 
lines,  he  ventured  to  say  that  before  two  or  three  years  had  elapsed 
they  would  have  made  sufficient  profit  to  take  sixpence  off  the 
income  tax  and  give  every  employee  over  seventy-five  years  of 
age  an  old  age  pension. 

Extract  7 

EMPLOYEE'S  ATTITUDE  TOWARD  WORKMEN'S 
COMPENSATION 

(J/;'.  J.  R.  Clynes^  Commons^  April  4,  igo6) 

Mr.  Clynks  ^  thought  that  they  had  heard  too  much  about  the 
small  employer  in  this  debate,  and  that  some  share  of  their  pity 
should  go  out  to  those  who  suffered  from  injuries  which  this  Bill 
proposed  to  meet.  The  debate  had  not  supplied  so  far  any  re- 
minder of  the  number  of  people  injured  and  killed  during  their 
daily  labour.  He  believed  there  were  about  400  workpeople  killed 
every  month  in  this  country,  and  about  7000  injured  in  one  way 
or  another.  The  first  point  which  he  desired  to  refer  to  was  the 
insufficiency  of  the  compensation  proposed  by  the  Bill.  The  com- 
pensation proposed  was  half  the  average  earnings  of  the  man.  He 
submitted  that  if  a  man  fairly  needed  all  his  wages  when  he  was 
well,  the  family  needed  even  more  than  the  whole  of  the  man's 
wages  when  he  was  ill.  Let  them  take  as  an  illustration  a  man 
earning  30s.  a  week  who  was  disabled  for  three  weeks.  The  man 
would  lose  £^  los.,  and  under  the  Bill  he  would  receive  as  com- 
pensation only  30s.  He  submitted  that  that  was  not  generous 
treatment,  and  they  were  entitled  to  call  upon  the  Government  to 
take  a  step  in  advance  of  the  attitude  assumed  by  the  Government 
some  years  ago  when  the  compensation  law  was  first  passed.  They 
felt  that  the  trades  and  industries  generally  could  afford  a  greater 
strain.    The  profits  of  trading  and  the  increase  of  the  wealth  of  the 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  155,  col.  1203  sqq. 


44  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

well-to-do  appeared  to  him  to  prove  conclusively  that  a  heavier  bur- 
den for  such  a  good  reason  could  well  be  borne  by  the  trades  and 
industries  of  this  country.  He  did  not  accept  the  suggestion  that 
the  small  employers  should  be  excluded  from  liability.  He  under- 
stood the  Home  Secretary  to  advocate  the  exclusion  of  small 
employers  because  they  were  indifferent  and  would  not  face  their 
responsibilities.  It  had  been  said  that  such  men  were  very  often 
ignorant  and  did  not  do  what  the  law  called  upon  them  to  do.  He 
had  yet  to  learn  that  indifference  to  and  ignorance  of  the  law  were 
sufficient  reasons  for  escaping  one's  responsibilities  in  regard  to 
the  common  law  of  the  land,  and  in  this  matter  he  thought  the 
Government  should  not  exclude  such  a  large  number  of  workers 
as  would  be  excluded  if  these  small  employers  of  labour  were 
enabled  to  escape  their  responsibilities.  The  small  employers  of 
labour  in  respect  of  their  profits  and  trading  conditions  knew  how 
to  combine,  and  if  they  could  not  singly  accept  the  liability  which 
the  principle  of  this  Bill  proposed,  then  they  might  act  in  associa- 
tion in  order  to  insure  the  lives  and  limbs  of  their  workmen.  He 
submitted  also  that  sufficient  reasons  had  not  been  given  by  the 
Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home  Department  for  the  exclusion  of 
domestic  servants  from  the  privileges  of  the  Bill.  Reference  had 
been  made  by  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  to  the  large  number  of 
domestic  servants  employed  by  working  people.  The  Labour  party 
made  no  plea  that  the  wage-earners  of  the  country  should  escape 
their  liabilities  in  respect  of  injuries  sustained  by  those  whom  they 
employed.  If  necessary,  they  should  call  upon  the  ordinary  working- 
man  to  insure  himself  against  the  risk  of  accidents  that  might  befall 
his  domestic  servant.  He  did  not  think  they  ought  to  exclude  clerks 
from  the  operation  of  the  Bill.  They  should  not  forget  that  there 
was  a  class  of  clerk  who  moved  about  large  works  and  shipping 
yards  amongst  machinery  in  order  to  take  down  details,  and  he  in- 
curred almost  as  great  a  risk  as  the  ordinary  workingman.  It  had 
been  said  upon  both  sides  of  the  House  that  it  was  not  advis- 
able to  depart  from  the  present  limit  of  a  fortnight,  because  of  the 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  45 

malingering  there  was  or  might  be  if  workingmen  were  entitled 
to  compensation  from  the  first  day  of  injury.  He  would  point  out 
that  if  a  workingman  went  home  and  said  he  had  been  hurt,  that 
would  not  be  taken  as  evidence  of  the  injury,  and  his  word  would 
not  be  taken  as  the  foundation  for  the  payment  of  compensation. 
The  doctor's  evidence  as  to  injury  and  incapacity  would  be  required 
before  any  workman  could  set  up  his  title  to  compensation.  He 
thought  the  officers  of  the  insurance  company,  the  agents  of  the 
employer,  and  all  the  things  attaching  to  a  workingman's  condi- 
tion of  work  would  protect  employers  against  the  risk  of  having 
to  pay  when  a  man  was  not  disabled  at  all.  There  were  many 
points  dealt  with  in  this  Bill  which  Labour  Members  warmly  wel- 
comed, but  having  accepted  the  payment  of  compensation  as  a 
principle,  and  that  industries  must  bear  the  cost  of  accidents  and 
deaths,  he  submitted  that  the  House  had  had  sufficient  experience 
of  industrial  life  to  justify  it  in  going  further  in  regard  to  the 
amount  of  compensation,  and  in  regard  to  the  other  items  which 
he  had  mentioned. 

Extract  8 

FORESHADOWING  NATIONAL  INSURANCE 

{Mr.  Herbert  J.  Gladstone,  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Ho7ne 
Department,  Commons,  December  ij,  igo6) 

Mr.  Gladstone  ^ :  .  .  .  He  had  no  occasion  to  detain  the  House 
long  upon  this  subject.  The  recent  discussion  extended  over  four 
days,  during  which  all  the  leading  points  of  the  Bill  were  fully  dis- 
cussed. But  there  was  one  matter  upon  which  he  desired  to  say  a 
few  words.  The  House  in  its  collective  wisdom  had  shown  an  in- 
veterate hostility  to  all  the  attempts  of  the  Government  to  exempt 
from  the  operation  of  this  Bill  the  small  employers.  Now  practi- 
cally all  classes  of  persons  under  contract  of  service,  whether  the 
employment  was  dangerous  or  safe,  were  included  in  the  purview 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  167,  col.  693  sqq. 


46  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  this  Bill.  While  6,000,000  people  were  brought  within  the 
operation  of  the  Act  in  1897,  and  1,000,000  in  1900,  there  were 
now  6,000,000  in  addition.  This  great  extension  did  involve 
benefit  —  he  hoped  great  benefit  —  but  it  also,  naturally,  involved 
some  danger  to  which  this  House  should  not  shut  their  eyes.  A 
number  of  small  employers  would  be  brought  under  the  operation 
of  this  Act,  and  it  was  to  be  hoped  that  they  would  be  raised  to  a 
sense  of  the  duty  imposed  upon  them  by  it  —  to  a  sense  of  the  ne- 
cessit)'  which  lay  upon  them  to  insure  against  the  liability  to  which 
they  would  be  exposed,  in  order  to  be  in  a  position  to  meet  it  in 
compensating  a  workman  who  might  be  injured.  Experience  showed 
that  a  mass  of  these  people  would  not  insure,  whatever  steps  were 
taken,  and  that  experience  was  reinforced  by  the  opinion  expressed 
in  the  Committee  which  considered  this  question.  It  was  pointed 
out  that  24  per  cent  of  those  engaged  in  the  building  trades  did 
not  choose  to  insure,  although  the  Act  had  been  in  operation  for 
some  six  or  seven  years.  If  the  Government  required  any  pressure, 
this  knowledge  and  this  information  from  the  Committee  would 
hasten  their  desire  to  deal  with  the  whole  subject  of  national  in- 
surance in  relation  to  the  law  of  employers'  liability.  But  in  the 
meanwhile  they  would  do  the  best  they  could,  through  Government 
agencies  or  otherwise,  to  warn  employers,  great  and  small,  through- 
out the  countr)^,  of  the  risks  they  were  under,  and  also  to  tell  the 
workpeople  of  this  country  what  rights  were  given  to  them  under 
this  Act.  .  .  . 

Extract  g 

THIRD  READING  OF  WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  BILL 

{M?:  Joseph  Walton^  Cojidiwiis^  December  ij,  igo6) 

Mr.  Walton  ^ :  .  .  .  He  felt  sure  that  the  6,000,000  additional 
workers  —  men  and  women  —  to  whom  this  measure  did  what  was 
an  act  of  justice  in  regard  to  this  matter,  would  greatly  appreciate 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  167,  col.  70S. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  47 

their  inclusion  within  the  scope  of  the  measure.  He  had  had  no 
sympathy  or  support  whatever  from  the  Tory  majority  in  the 
House,  when  he  had  introduced  his  Bill,  but  he  gathered  from 
speeches  made  by  Members  of  the  same  political  Party  now  sitting 
in  Opposition  that  he  might  regard  them  as  repentant  sinners.  It 
was  indeed  a  death-bed  repentance  when  they  rose  the  other  night 
and  proposed  the  inclusion  of  2,000,000  of  domestic  servants 
within  the  scope  of  the  Bill.  He  welcomed  that  inclusion,  but  it 
was  so  hastily  adopted  by  the  House  that  he  hoped,  now  that  they 
were  included,  it  was  clearly  understood  that  in  case  of  accident 
they  were  to  receive  not  only  half  their  wages,  but  half  the  cost  of 
their  board  and  lodging  as  well,  in  case  they  were  deprived  of  that, 
as  that  formed  the  greatest  part  of  their  earnings.  He  cordially 
supported  the  Bill. 

Extract  10 

WORKMEN'S   COMPENSATION  ACT,  1906 

{6  Edw.  7,  ch.  jS) 

An  Act  to  consolidate  and  amend  the  Law  with  respect  to  Com- 
pensation to  Workmen  for  Injuries  suffered  in  the  course  of 
their  Employment.  (21st  December  igo6) 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 

I.  Liability  of  Employers  to  Workmen  for  Injuries 

(i)  If  in  any  employment  personal  injury  by  accident  arising 
out  of  and  in  the  course  of  the  employment  is  caused  to  a  work- 
man, his  employer  shall,  subject  as  herein-after  mentioned,  be 
liable  to  pay  compensation  in  accordance  with  the  First  Schedule 
to  this  Act. 


48  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(2)  Provided  that  — 

(a)  The  employer  shall  not  be  liable  under  this  Act  in  respect 
of  any  injury  which  does  not  disable  the  workman  for 
a  period  of  at  least  one  week  from  earning  full  wages 
at  the  work  at  which  he  was  employed : 

(<^)  When  the  injury  was  caused  by  the  personal  negligence 
or  wilful  act  of  the  employer  or  of  some  person  for 
whose  act  or  default  the  employer  is  responsible,  noth- 
ing in  this  Act  shall  affect  any  civil  liability  of  the 
employer,  but  in  that  case  the  workman  may,  at  his 
option,  either  claim  compensation  under  this  Act  or 
take  proceedings  independently  of  this  Act ;  but  the 
employer  shall  not  be  liable  to  pay  compensation  for 
injury  to  a  workman  by  accident  arising  out  of  and  in 
the  course  of  the  employment  both  independently  of 
and  also  under  this  Act,  and  shall  not  be  liable  to  any 
proceedings  independently  of  this  Act,  except  in  case 
of  such  personal  negligence  or  wilful  act  as  aforesaid : 

(/)  If  it  is  proved  that  the  injury  to  a  workman  is  attrib- 
utable to  the  serious  and  wilful  misconduct  of  that 
workman,  any  compensation  claimed  in  respect  of 
that  injury  shall,  unless  the  injury  results  in  death  or 
serious  and  permanent  disablement,  be  disallowed. 

(3)  If  any  question  arises  in  any  proceedings  under  this  Act  as 
to  the  liability  to  pay  compensation  under  this  Act  (including  any 
question  as  to  whether  the  person  injured  is  a  workman  to  whom 
this  Act  applies),  or  as  to  the  amount  or  duration  of  compensation 
under  this  Act,  the  question,  if  not  settled  by  agreement,  shall, 
subject  to  the  provisions  of  the  First  Schedule  to  this  Act,  be 
settled  by  arbitration,  in  accordance  with  the  Second  Schedule  to 
this  Act. 

(4)  If,  within  the  time  herein-after  in  this  Act  limited  for  taking 
proceedings,  an  action  is  brought  to  recover  damages  independ- 
ently of  this  Act  for  injury  caused   by  any  accident,  and  it  is 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  49 

determined  in  such  action  that  the  injury  is  one  for  which  the 
employer  is  not  liable  in  such  action,  but  that  he  would  have  been 
liable  to  pay  compensation  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  the 
action  shall  be  dismissed  ;  but  the  court  in  which  the  action  is 
tried  shall,  if  the  plaintiff  so  choose,  proceed  to  assess  such  com- 
pensation, but  may  deduct  from  such  compensation  all  or  part  of 
the  costs  which,  in  its  judgment,  have  been  caused  by  the  plaintiff 
bringing  the  action  instead  of  proceeding  under  this  Act.  In  any 
proceeding  under  this  subsection,  when  the  court  assesses  the 
compensation  it  shall  give  a  certificate  of  the  compensation  it  has 
awarded  and  the  directions  it  has  given  as  to  the  deduction  for 
costs,  and  such  certificate  shall  have  the  force  and  effect  of  an 
award  under  this  Act. 

(5)  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  affect  any  proceeding  for  a  fine 
under  the  enactments  relating  to  mines,  factories,  or  workshops, 
or  the  application  of  any  such  fine. 

2.   Time  for  taking  Proceedings 

(i)  Proceedings  for  the  recovery  under  this  Act  of  compensa- 
tion for  an  injury  shall  not  be  maintainable  unless  notice  of  the 
accident  has  been  given  as  soon  as  practicable  after  the  hap- 
pening thereof  and  before  the  workman  has  voluntarily  left  the 
employment  in  which  he  was  injured,  and  unless  the  claim  for 
compensation  with  respect  to  such  accident  has  been  made  within 
six  months  from  the  occurrence  of  the  accident  causing  the  injury, 
or,  in  case  of  death,  within  six  months  from  the  time  of  death : 
Provided  always  that  — 

(ci)  The  want  of  or  any  defect  or  inaccuracy  in  such  notice 
shall  not  be  a  bar  to  the  maintenance  of  such  proceed- 
ings if  it  is  found  in  the  proceedings  for  settling  the 
claim  that  the  employer  is  not,  or  would  not,  if  a 
notice  or  an  amended  notice  were  then  given  and  the 
hearing  postponed,  be  prejudiced  in  his  defence  by 


50  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  want,  defect,  or  inaccuracy,  or  that  such  want, 
defect,  or  inaccuracy  was  occasioned  by  mistake,  ab- 
sence from  the  United  Kingdom,  or  other  reasonable 
cause ;  and 
(J))  the  failure  to  make  a  claim  within  the  period  above  speci- 
fied shall  not  be  a  bar  to  the  maintenance  of  such 
proceedings  if  it  is  found  that  the  failure  was  occa- 
sioned by  mistake,  absence  from  the  United  Kingdom, 
or  other  reasonable  cause. 

(2)  Notice  in  respect  of  an  injury  under  this  Act  shall  give  the 
name  and  address  of  the  person  injured,  and  shall  state  in  ordi- 
nary language  the  cause  of  the  injury  and  the  date  at  which  the 
accident  happened,  and  shall  be  served  on  the  employer,  or,  if 
there  is  more  than  one  employer,  upon  one  of  such  employers. 

(3)  The  notice  may  be  served  by  delivering  the  same  at,  or 
sending  it  by  post  in  a  registered  letter  addressed  to,  the  residence 
or  place  of  business  of  the  person  on  whom  it  is  to  be  served. 

(4)  Where  the  employer  is  a  body  of  persons,  corporate  or  un- 
incorporate,  the  notice  may  also  be  served  by  delivering  the  same 
at,  or  by  sending  it  by  post  in  a  registered  letter  addressed  to,  the 
employer  at  the  office,  or,  if  there  be  more  than  one  office,  any  one 
of  the  offices  of  such  body. 

J.    Contracting  Out 

(i)  If  the  Registrar  of  Friendly  Societies,  after  taking  steps  to 
ascertain  the  views  of  the  employer  and  workmen,  certifies  that 
any  scheme  of  compensation,  benefit,  or  insurance  for  the  work- 
men of  an  employer  in  any  employment,  whether  or  not  such 
scheme  includes  other  employers  and  their  workmen,  provides 
scales  of  compensation  not  less  favourable  to  the  workmen  and 
their  dependants  than  the  corresponding  scales  contained  in  this 
Act,  and  that,  where  the  scheme  provides  for  contributions  by  the 
workmen,  the  scheme  confers  benefits  at  least  equivalent  to  those 
contributions,  in  addition  to  the  benefits  to  which  the  workmen 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  5  I 

would  have  been  entitled  under  this  Act,  and  that  a  majority  (to 
be  ascertained  by  ballot)  of  the  workmen  to  whom  the  scheme  is 
applicable  are  in  favour  of  such  scheme,  the  employer  may,  whilst 
the  certificate  is  in  force,  contract  with  any  of  his  workmen  that 
the  provisions  of  the  scheme  shall  be  substituted  for  the  provisions 
of  this  Act,  and  thereupon  the  employer  shall  be  liable  only  in 
accordance  with  the  scheme,  but,  save  as  aforesaid,  this  Act  shall 
apply  notwithstanding  any  contract  to  the  contrary  made  after  the 
commencement  of  this  Act. 

(2)  The  Registrar  may  give  a  certificate  to  expire  at  the  end  of 
a  limited  period  of  not  less  than  five  years,  and  may  from  time 
to  time  renew  with  or  without  modifications  such  a  certificate  to 
expire  at  the  end  of  the  period  for  which  it  is  renewed. 

(3)  No  scheme  shall  be  so  certified  which  contains  an  obliga- 
tion upon  the  workmen  to  join  the  scheme  as  a  condition  of  their 
hiring,  or  which  does  not  contain  provisions  enabling  a  workman 
to  withdraw  from  the  scheme. 

(4)  If  complaint  is  made  to  the  Registrar  of  Friendly  Societies 
by  or  on  behalf  of  the  workmen  of  any  employer  that  the  benefits 
conferred  by  any  scheme  no  longer  conform  to  the  conditions 
stated  in  subsection  (i)  of  this  section,  or  that  the  provisions  of 
such  scheme  are  being  violated,  or  that  the  scheme  is  not  being 
fairly  administered,  or  that  satisfactory  reasons  exist  for  revoking 
the  certificate,  the  Registrar  shall  examine  into  the  complaint,  and, 
if  satisfied  that  good  cause  exist  for  such  complaint,  shall,  unless 
the  cause  of  complaint  is  removed,  revoke  the  certificate. 

(5)  When  a  certificate  is  revoked  or  expires,  any  moneys  or 
securities  held  for  the  purpose  of  the  scheme  shall,  after  due  pro- 
vision has  been  made  to  discharge  the  liabilities  already  accrued, 
be  distributed  as  may  be  arranged  between  the  employer  and 
workmen,  or  as  may  be  determined  by  the  Registrar  of  Friendly 
Societies  in  the  event  of  a  difference  of  opinion. 

(6)  Whenever  a  scheme  has  been  certified  as  aforesaid,  it  shall 
be  the  duty  of  the  employer  to  answer  all  such  inquiries  and  to 


52  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

furnish  all  such  accounts  in  regard  to  the  scheme  as  may  be  made 
or  required  by  the  Registrar  of  Friendly  Societies. 

(7)  The  Chief  Registrar  of  Friendly  Societies  shall  include 
in  his  annual  report  the  particulars  of  the  proceedings  of  the 
Registrar  under  this  Act. 

(8)  The  Chief  Registrar  of  Friendly  Societies  may  make  regu- 
lations for  the  purpose  of  carrying  this  section  into  effect. 

4.  Sub-contracting 

(i)  Where  any  person  (in  this  section  referred  to  as  the  prin- 
cipal), in  the  course  of  or  for  the  purposes  of  his  trade  or  business, 
contracts  with  any  other  person  (in  this  section  referred  to  as 
the  contractor)  for  the  execution  by  or  under  the  contractor  of  the 
whole  or  any  part  of  any  work  undertaken  by  the  principal,  the 
principal  shall  be  liable  to  pay  to  any  workman  employed  in  the  ex- 
ecution of  the  work  any  compensation  under  this  Act  which  he 
would  have  been  liable  to  pay  if  that  workman  had  been  immedi- 
ately employed  by  him ;  and  where  compensation  is  claimed  from 
or  proceedings  are  taken  against  the  principal,  then,  in  the  applica- 
tion of  this  Act,  references  to  the  principal  shall  be  substituted  for 
references  to  the  employer,  except  that  the  amount  of  compensation 
shall  be  calculated  with  reference  to  the  earnings  of  the  workman 
under  the  employer  by  whom  he  is  immediately  employed : 

Provided  that,  where  the  contract  relates  to  threshing,  plough- 
ing, or  other  agricultural  work,  and  the  contractor  provides  and 
uses  machinery  driven  by  mechanical  power  for  the  purpose  of 
such  work,  he  and  he  alone  shall  be  liable  under  this  Act  to  pay 
compensation  to  any  workman  employed  by  him  on  such  work. 

(2)  Where  the  principal  is  liable  to  pay  compensation  under 
this  section,  he  shall  be  entitled  to  be  indemnified  by  any  person 
who  would  have  been  liable  to  pay  compensation  to  the  workman 
independently  of  this  section,  and  all  questions  as  to  the  right  to 
and  amount  of  any  such  indemnity  shall  in  default  of  agreement 
be  settled  by  arbitration  under  this  Act. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  53 

(3)  Nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  construed  as  preventing  a 
workman  recovering  compensation  under  this  Act  from  the  con- 
tractor instead  of  the  principal. 

(4)  This  section  shall  not  apply  in  any  case  where  the  accident 
occurred  elsewhere  than  on,  or  in,  or  about  premises  on  which  the 
principal  has  undertaken  to  execute  the  work  or  which  are  other- 
wise under  his  control  or  management. 

5.  Pnnnsion  as  to  Cases  of  Bankruptcy  of  Employer 

(i)  Where  any  employer  has  entered  into  a  contract  with  any 
insurers  in  respect  of  any  liability  under  this  Act  to  any  workman, 
then,  in  the  event  of  the  employer  becoming  bankrupt,  or  making 
a  composition  or  arrangement  with  his  creditors,  or  if  the  employer 
is  a  company  in  the  event  of  the  company  having  commenced  to 
be  wound  up,  the  rights  of  the  employer  against  the  insurers  as 
respects  that  liability  shall,  notwithstanding  anything  in  the  enact- 
ments relating  to  bankruptcy  and  the  winding  up  of  companies, 
be  transferred  to  and  vest  in  the  workman,  and  upon  any  such 
transfer  the  insurers  shall  have  the  same  rights  and  remedies  and 
be  subject  to  the  same  liabilities  as  if  they  were  the  employer,  so 
however  that  the  insurers  shall  not  be  under  any  greater  liability 
to  the  workman  than  they  would  have  been  under  to  the  employer. 

(2)  If  the  liability  of  the  insurers  to  the  workman  is  less  than 
the  liability  of  the  employer  to  the  workman,  the  workman  may 
prove  for  the  balance  in  the  bankruptcy  or  liquidation. 

(3)  There  shall  be  included  among  the  debts  which  under  sec- 
tion one  of  the  Preferential  Payments  in  Bankruptcy  Act,  1888, 
and  section  four  of  the  Preferential  Payments  in  Bankruptcy  (Ire- 
land) Act,  i88g,  are  in  the  distribution  of  the  property  of  a  bank- 
rupt and  in  the  distribution  of  the  assets  of  a  company  being  wound 
up  to  be  paid  in  priority  to  all  other  debts,  the  amount,  not  exceed- 
ing in  any  individual  case  one  hundred  pounds,  due  in  respect  of 
any  compensation  the  liability  wherefor  accrued  before  the  date 
of  the  receiving  order  or  the  date  of  the  commencement  of  the 


54  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

winding  up,  and  those  Acts  and  the  Preferential  Payments  in 
Bankruptcy  Amendment  Act,  1897,  shall  have  effect  accordingly. 
Where  the  compensation  is  a  weekly  payment,  the  amount  due 
in  respect  thereof  shall,  for  the  purposes  of  this  provision,  be  taken 
to  be  the  amount  of  the  lump  sum  for  which  the  weekly  payment 
could,  if  redeemable,  be  redeemed  if  the  employer  made  an  appli- 
cation for  that  purpose  under  the  First  Schedule  to  this  Act. 

(4)  In  the  case  of  the  winding  up  of  a  company  within  the 
meaning  of  the  Stannaries  Act,  1887,  such  an  amount  as  afore- 
said, if  the  compensation  is  payable  to  a  miner  or  the  dependants 
of  a  miner,  shall  have  the  like  priority  as  is  conferred  on  wages 
of  miners  by  section  nine  of  that  Act,  and  that  section  shall  have 
effect  accordingly. 

(5)  The  provisions  of  this  section  with  respect  to  preferences 
and  priorities  shall  not  apply  where  the  bankrupt  or  the  company 
being  wound  up  has  entered  into  such  a  contract  with  insurers  as 
aforesaid. 

(6)  This  section  shall  not  apply  where  a  company  is  wound  up 
voluntarily  merely  for  the  purposes  of  reconstruction  or  of  amal- 
gamation with  another  company. 

6.  Remedies  both  against  Employer  and  Stranger 

Where  the  injury  for  which  compensation  is  payable  under  this 
Act  was  caused  under  circumstances  creating  a  legal  liability  in 
some  person  other  than  the  employer  to  pay  damages  in  respect 
thereof  — 

(i)  The  workman  may  take  proceedings  both  against  that  per- 
son to  recover  damages  and  against  any  person  liable  to 
pay  compensation  under  this  Act  for  such  compensation, 
but  shall  not  be  entitled  to  recover  both  damages  and 
compensation ;  and 
(2)  If  the  workman  has  recovered  compensation  under  this  Act, 
the  person  by  whom  the  compensation  was  paid,  and 
any  person  who  has  been  called  on  to  pay  an  indemnity 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  55 

under  the  section  of  this  Act  relating  to  sub-contracting, 
shall  be  entitled  to  be  indemnified  by  the  person  so  liable 
to  pay  damages  as  aforesaid,  and  all  questions  as  to  the 
right  to  and  amount  of  any  such  indemnity  shall,  in  de- 
fault of  agreement,  be  settled  by  action,  or,  by  consent 
of  the  parties,  by  arbitration  under  this  Act. 

7.  Application  of  Act  to  Seamen 

(i)  This  Act  shall  apply  to  masters,  seamen,  and  apprentices 
to  the  sea  service  and  apprentices  in  the  sea-fishing  service,  pro- 
vided that  such  persons  are  workmen  within  the  meaning  of  this 
Act,  and  are  members  of  the  crew  of  any  ship  registered  in  the 
United  Kingdom,  or  of  any  other  British  ship  or  vessel  of  which 
the  owner,  or  (if  there  is  more  than  one  owner)  the  managing 
owner,  or  manager  resides  or  has  his  principal  place  of  business 
in  the  United  Kingdom,  subject  to  the  following  modifications : 
(a)  The  notice  of  accident  and  the  claim  for  compensation  may, 
except  where  the  person  injured  is  the  master,  be  served 
on  the  master  of  the  ship  as  if  he  were  the  employer,  but 
where  the  accident  happened  and  the  incapacity  com- 
menced on  board  the  ship  it  shall  not  be  necessary  to 
give  any  notice  of  the  accident : 
{]})  In  the  case  of  the  death  of  the  master,  seaman,  or  apprentice, 
the  claim  for  compensation  shall  be  made  within  six  months 
after  news  of  the  death  has  been  received  by  the  claimant : 
(r)  Where  an  injured  master,  seaman,  or  apprentice  is  discharged 
or  left  behind  in  a  British  possession  or  in  a  foreign  coun- 
try, depositions  respecting  the  circumstances  and  nature 
of  the  injury  may  be  taken  by  any  judge  or  magistrate 
in  the  British  possession,  and  by  any  British  consular  offi- 
cer in  the  foreign  country,  and  if  so  taken  shall  be  trans- 
mitted by  the  person  by  whom  they  are  taken  to  the 
Board  of  Trade,  and  such  depositions  or  certified  copies 
thereof  shall  in  any  proceedings  for  enforcing  the  claim 


56  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

be  admissible  in  evidence  as  provided  by  sections  691 
and  695  of  the  Merchant  Shipping  Act,  1894,  and  those 
sections  shall  apply  accordingly : 

(d)  In  the  case  of  the  death  of  a  master,  seaman,  or  apprentice, 

leaving  no  dependants,  no  compensation  shall  be  payable, 
if  the  owner  of  the  ship  is  under  the  Merchant  Shipping 
Act,  1894,  liable  to  pay  the  expenses  of  burial : 

(e)  The  weekly  payment  shall  not  be  payable  in  respect  of  the 

period  during  which  the  owner  of  the  ship  is,  under  the 
Merchant  Shipping  Act,  1894,  as  amended  by  any  subse- 
quent enactment,  or  otherwise,  liable  to  defray  the  ex- 
penses of  maintenance  of  the  injured  master,  seaman,  or 
apprentice : 
(_/)  Any  sum  payable  by  way  of  compensation  by  the  owner  of 
a  ship  under  this  Act  shall  be  paid  in  full  notwithstand- 
ing anything  in  section  503  of  the  Merchant  Shipping 
Act,  1894  (which  relates  to  the  limitation  of  a  shipowner's 
liability  in  certain  cases  of  loss  of  life,  injur}',  or  damage), 
but  the  limitation  on  the  owner's  liability  imposed  by  that 
section  shall  apply  to  the  amount  recoverable  by  way  of 
indemnity,  under  the  section  of  this  Act  relating  to  reme- 
dies both  against  employer  and  stranger,  as  if  the  indem- 
nity were  damages  for  loss  of  life  or  personal  injury : 
{g)  Subsections  (2)  and  (3)  of  section  174  of  the  Merchant 
Shipping  Act,  1894  (which  relates  to  the  recovery  of 
wages  of  seamen  lost  with  their  ship),  shall  apply  as  re- 
spects proceedings  for  the  recovery  of  compensation  by 
dependants  of  masters,  seamen,  and  apprentices  lost  with 
their  ship  as  they  apply  with  respect  to  proceedings  for  the 
recovery  of  wages  due  to  seamen  and  apprentices ;  and 
proceedings  for  the  recovery  of  compensation  shall  in 
such  a  case  be  maintainable  if  the  claim  is  made  within 
eighteen  months  of  the  date  at  which  the  ship  is  deemed 
to  have  been  lost  with  all  hands : 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  57 

(2)  This  Act  shall  not  apply  to  such  members  of  the  crew  of 
a  fishing  vessel  as  are  remunerated  by  shares  in  the  profits  or  the 
gross  earnings  of  the  working  of  such  vessel. 

(3)  This  section  shall  extend  to  pilots  to  whom  Part  X  of  the 
Merchant  Shipping  Act,  1894,  applies,  as  if  a  pilot  when  employed  on 
any  such  ship  as  aforesaid  were  a  seaman  and  a  member  of  the  crew. 

8.  Application  of  Act  to  Industrial  Diseases 
(i)  Where  — 

(i)  the  certifying  surgeon  appointed  under  the  Factory  and 
Workshop  Act,  1901,  for  the  district  in  which  a  work- 
man is  employed  certifies  that  the  workman  is  suffering 
from  a  disease  mentioned  in  the  Third  Schedule  to  this 
Act  and  is  thereby  disabled  from  earning  full  wages  at 
the  work  at  which  he  was  employed ;  or 
(ii)  a  workman  is,  in  pursuance  of  any  special  rules  or  regula- 
tions made  under  the  Factory  and  Workshop  Act,  1901, 
suspended  from  his  usual  employment  on  account  of 
having  contracted  any  such  disease ;  or 
(iii)  the  death  of  a  workman  is  caused  by  any  such  disease ; 
and  the  disease  is  due  to  the  nature  of  any  employment  in  which 
the  workman  was  employed  at  any  time  within  the  twelve  months 
previous  to  the  date  of  the  disablement  or  suspension,  whether 
under  one  or  more  employers,  he  or  his  dependants  shall  be  en- 
titled to  compensation  under  this  Act  as  if  the  disease  or  such 
suspension  as  aforesaid  were  a  personal  injury  by  accident  arising 
out  of  and  in  the  course  of  that  employment,  subject  to  the  fol- 
lowing modifications : 

{a)  The   disablement   or   suspension    shall   be    treated   as   the 

happening  of  the  accident ; 
il'i)  If  it  is  proved  that  the  workman  has  at  the  time  of  entering 
the  employment  wilfully  and  falsely  represented  himself 
in  writing  as  not  having  previously  suffered  from  the  dis- 
ease, compensation  shall  not  be  payable  ; 


58  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(c)  The  compensation  shall  be  recoverable  from  the  employer 
who  last  employed  the  workman  during  the  said  twelve 
months  in  the  employment  to  the  nature  of  which  the 
disease  was  due : 
Provided  that  — 

(i)  the  workman  or  his  dependants  if  so  required 
shall  furnish  that  employer  with  such  infor- 
mation as  to  the  names  and  addresses  of  all 
the  other  employers  who  employed  him  in  the 
employment  during  the  said  twelve  months  as 
he  or  they  may  possess,  and,  if  such  informa- 
tion is  not  furnished,  or  is  not  sufficient  to 
enable  that  employer  to  take  proceedings 
under  the  next  following  proviso,  that  em- 
ployer upon  proving  that  the  disease  was  not 
contracted  whilst  the  workman  was  in  his 
employment  shall  not  be  liable  to  pay  com- 
pensation ;  and 
(ii)  if  that  employer  alleges  that  the  disease  was  in 
fact  contracted  whilst  the  workman  was  in  the 
employment  of  some  other  employer,  and  not 
whilst  in  his  employment,  he  may  join  such 
other  employer  as  a  party  to  the  arbitration, 
and  if  the  allegation  is  proved  that  other  em- 
ployer shall  be  the  employer  from  whom  the 
compensation  is  to  be  recoverable ;  and 
(iii)  if  the  disease  is  of  such  a  nature  as  to  be  con- 
tracted by  a  gradual  process,  any  other  em- 
ployers, who  during  the  said  twelve  months 
employed  the  workman  in  the  employment  to 
the  nature  of  which  the  disease  was  due,  shall 
be  liable  to  make  to  the  employer  from  whom 
compensation  is  recoverable  such  contributions 
&s,  in  default  of  agreement,  may  be  determined 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  59 

in  the  arbitration  under  this  Act  for  settling 
the  amount  of  the  compensation  ; 
(d)  The  amount  of  the  compensation  shall  be  calculated  with 
reference  to  the  earnings  of  the  workman  under  the  em- 
ployer from  whom  the  compensation  is  recoverable  ; 
(e)  The  employer  to  whom  notice  of  the  death,  disablement,  or 
suspension  is  to  be  given  shall  be  the  employer  who  last 
employed  the  workman  during  the  said  twelve  months  in 
the  employment  to  the  nature  of  which  the  disease  was 
due,  and  the  notice  may  be  given  notwithstanding  that 
the  workman  has  voluntarily  left  his  employment ; 
(_/)  If  an  employer  or  a  workman  is  aggrieved  by  the  action  of 
a  certifying  or  other  surgeon  in  giving  or  refusing  to 
give  a  certificate  of   disablement  or  in  suspending  or 
refusing  to  suspend  a  workman  for  the  purposes  of  this 
section,  the  matter  shall  in  accordance  with  regulations 
made  by  the  Secretary  of  State  be  referred  to  a  medical 
referee,  whose  decision  shall  be  final. 

(2)  If  the  workman  at  or  immediately  before  the  date  of  the 
disablement  or  suspension  was  employed  in  any  process  men- 
tioned in  the  second  column  of  the  Third  Schedule  to  this  Act, 
and  the  disease  contracted  is  the  disease  in  the  first  column  of  that 
Schedule  set  opposite  the  description  of  the  process,  the  disease, 
except  where  the  certifying  surgeon  certifies  that  in  his  opinion 
the  disease  was  not  due  to  the  nature  of  the  employment,  shall 
be  deemed  to  have  been  due  to  the  nature  of  that  employment, 
unless  the  employer  proves  the  contrary. 

(3)  The  Secretary  of  State  may  make  rules  regulating  the 
duties  and  fees  of  certifying  and  other  surgeons  (including  den- 
tists) under  this  section. 

(4)  For  the  purposes  of  this  section  the  date  of  disablement 
shall  be  such  date  as  the  certifying  surgeon  certifies  as  the  date 
on  which  the  disablement  commenced,  or,  if  he  is  unable  to  certify 
such  a  date,  the  date  on  which  the  certificate  is  given : 


6o  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Provided  that  — 

(a)  Where  the  medical  referee  allows  an  appeal  against  a 
refusal  by  a  certifying  surgeon  to  give  a  certificate  of 
disablement,  the  date  of  disablement  shall  be  such  date 
as  the  medical  referee  may  determine ; 

(F)  Where  a  workman  dies  without  having  obtained  a  cer- 
tificate of  disablement,  or  is  at  the  time  of  death  not 
in  receipt  of  a  weekly  payment  on  account  of  disable- 
ment, it  shall  be  the  date  of  death. 

(5)  In  such  cases,  and  subject  to  such  conditions  as  the  Sec- 
retary of  State  may  direct,  a  medical  practitioner  appointed  by 
the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  purpose  shall  have  the  powers  and 
duties  of  a  certifying  surgeon  under  this  section,  and  this  section 
shall  be  construed  accordingly. 

(6)  The  Secretary  of  State  may  make  .orders  for  extending  the 
provisions  of  this  section  to  other  diseases  and  other  processes, 
and  to  injuries  due  to  the  nature  of  any  employment  specified 
in  the  order  not  being  injuries  by  accident,  either  without  modi- 
fication or  subject  to  such  modifications  as  may  be  contained 
in  the  order. 

(7)  Where,  after  inquiry  held  on  the  application  of  any  em- 
ployers or  workmen  engaged  in  any  industry  to  which  this  sec- 
tion applies,  it  appears  that  a  mutual  trade  insurance  company  or 
society  for  insuring  against  the  risks  under  this  section  has  been 
established  for  the  industry,  and  that  a  majority  of  the  employers 
engaged  in  that  industry  are  insured  against  such  risks  in  the 
company  or  society  and  that  the  company  or  society  consents, 
the  Secretary  of  State  may,  by  Provisional  Order,  require  all  em- 
ployers in  that  industry  to  insure  in  the  company  or  society  upon 
such  terms  and  under  such  conditions  and  subject  to  such  excep- 
tions as  may  be  set  forth  in  the  Order.  Where  such  a  company 
or  society  has  been  established,  but  is  confined  to  employers  in 
any  particular  locality  or  of  any  particular  class,  the  Secretary  of 
State  may  for  the  purposes  of  this  provision  treat  the  industry, 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  6l 

as  carried  on  by  employers  in  that  locality  or  of  that  class,  as  a 
separate  industry. 

(8)  A  Provisional  Order  made  under  this  section  shall  be  of  no 
force  whatever  unless  and  until  it  is  confirmed  by  Parliament,  and 
if,  while  the  Bill  confirming  any  such  Order  is  pending  in  either 
House  of  Parliament,  a  petition  is  presented  against  the  Order, 
the  Bill  may  be  referred  to  a  Select  Committee,  and  the  petitioner 
shall  be  allowed  to  appear  and  oppose  as  in  the  case  of  Private 
Bills,  and  any  Act  confirming  any  Provisional  Order  under  this 
section  may  be  repealed,  altered,  or  amended  by  a  Provisional 
Order  made  and  confirmed  in  like  manner. 

(9)  Any  expenses  incurred  by  the  Secretary  of  State  in  respect 
of  any  such  Order,  Provisional  Order,  or  confirming  Bill  shall  be 
defrayed  out  of  moneys  provided  by  Parliament. 

(10)  Nothing  in  this  section  shall  affect  the  rights  of  a  workman 
to  recover  compensation  in  respect  of  a  disease  to  which  this  sec- 
tion does  not  apply,  if  the  disease  is  a  personal  injury  by  accident 
within  the  meaning  of  this  Act. 

g.  Applicatmi  to  Workmen  in  Employment  of  Crozvfi 

(i)  This  Act  shall  not  apply  to  persons  in  the  naval  or  military 
service  of  the  Crown,  but  otherwise  shall  apply  to  workmen  em- 
ployed by  or  under  the  Crown  to  whom  this  Act  would  apply  if 
the  employer  were  a  private  person : 

Provided  that  in  the  case  of  a  person  employed  in  the  private 
service  of  the  Crown,  the  head  of  that  department  of  the  Royal 
Household  in  which  he  was  employed  at  the  time  of  the  accident 
shall  be  deemed  to  be  his  employer. 

(2)  The  Treasury  may,  by  warrant  laid  before  Parliament, 
modify  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act  their  warrant  made  under 
section  one  of  the  Superannuation  Act,  1887,  and  notwithstanding 
anything  in  that  Act,  or  any  such  warrant,  may  frame  schemes 
with  a  view  to  their  being  certified  by  the  Registrar  of  Friendly 
Societies  under  this  Act. 


62  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

10.  Appointment  and  Remit?ieration  of  Medical  Referees 
and  Arbitrators 

(i)  The  Secretary  of  State  may  appoint  such  legally  qualified 
medical  practitioners  to  be  medical  referees  for  the  purposes  of 
this  Act  as  he  may,  with  the  sanction  of  the  Treasury,  determine, 
and  the  remuneration  of,  and  other  expenses  incurred  by,  medical 
referees  under  this  Act  shall,  subject  to  regulations  made  by  the 
Treasury,  be  paid  out  of  moneys  provided  by  Parliament. 

Where  a  medical  referee  has  been  employed  as  a  medical  prac- 
titioner in  connection  with  any  case  by  or  on  behalf  of  an  em- 
ployer or  workman  or  by  any  insurers  interested,  he  shall  not  act 
as  medical  referee  in  that  case. 

(2)  The  remuneration  of  an  arbitrator  appointed  by  a  judge  of 
county  courts  under  the  Second  Schedule  to  this  Act  shall  be  paid 
out  of  moneys  provided  by  Parliament  in  accordance  with  regula- 
tions made  by  the  Treasury. 

II.  Detention  of  Ships 

(i)  If  it  is  alleged  that  the  owners  of  any  ship  are  liable  as  such 
owners  to  pay  compensation  under  this  Act,  and  at  any  time  that 
ship  is  found  in  any  port  or  river  of  England  or  Ireland,  or  within 
three  miles  of  the  coast  thereof,  a  judge  of  any  court  of  record  in 
England  or  Ireland  may,  upon  its  being  shown  to  him  by  any  per- 
son applying  in  accordance  with  the  rules  of  the  court  that  the 
owners  are  probably  liable  as  such  to  pay  such  compensation,  and 
that  none  of  the  owners  reside  in  the  United  Kingdom,  issue  an 
order  directed  to  any  officer  of  customs  or  other  officer  named  by 
the  judge  requiring  him  to  detain  the  ship  until  such  time  as  the 
owners,  agent,  master,  or  consignee  thereof  have  paid  such  com- 
pensation, or  have  given  security,  to  be  approved  by  the  judge,  to 
abide  the  event  of  any  proceedings  that  may  be  instituted  to  re- 
cover such  compensation  and  to  pay  such  compensation  and  costs 
as  may  be  awarded  thereon  ;  and  any  officer  of  customs  or  other  offi- 
cer to  whom  the  order  is  directed  shall  detain  the  ship  accordingly. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  63 

(2)  In  any  legal  proceeding  to  recover  such  compensation,  the 
person  giving  security  shall  be  made  defendant,  and  the  production 
of  the  order  of  the  judge,  made  in  relation  to  the  security,  shall  be 
conclusive  evidence  of  the  liability  of  the  defendant  to  the  pro- 
ceeding. 

(3)  Section  692  of  the  Merchant  Shipping  Act,  1894,  shall  apply 
to  the  detention  of  a  ship  under  this  Act  as  it  applies  to  the  deten- 
tion of  a  ship  under  that  Act,  and,  if  the  owner  of  a  ship  is  a  cor- 
poration, it  shall  for  the  purposes  of  this  section  be  deemed  to 
reside  in  the  United  Kingdom  if  it  has  an  office  in  the  United 
Kingdom  at  which  service  of  writs  can  be  effected. 

12.  Returns  as  to  Cojnpcnsation 

(i)  Every  employer  in  any  industry  to  which  the  Secretary  of 
State  may  direct  that  this  section  shall  apply  shall,  on  or  before 
such  day  in  every  year  as  the  Secretary  of  State  may  direct,  send 
to  the  Secretary  of  State  a  correct  return  specifying  the  number  of 
injuries  in  respect  of  which  compensation  has  been  paid  by  him 
under  this  Act  during  the  previous  year,  and  the  amount  of  such 
compensation,  together  with  such  other  particulars  as  to  the  com- 
pensation as  the  Secretary  of  State  may  direct,  and  in  default  of 
complying  with  this  section  shall  be  liable  on  conviction  under  the 
Summary  Jurisdiction  Acts  to  a  fine  not  exceeding  five  pounds. 

(2)  Any  regulations  made  by  the  Secretary  of  State  containing 
such  directions  as  aforesaid  shall  be  laid  before  both  Houses  of 
Parliament  as  soon  as  may  be  after  they  are  made. 

I  J.  Definitions 

In  this  Act,  unless  the  context  otherwise  requires  — 

"  Employer  "  includes  any  body  of  persons  corporate  or  un- 
incorporate  and  the  legal  personal  representative  of  a 
deceased  employer,  and,  where  the  services  of  a  workman 
are  temporarily  lent  or  let  on  hire  to  another  person  by  the 
person  with  whom  the  workman  has  entered  into  a  contract 


64  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  service  or  apprenticeship,  the  latter  shall,  for  the  pur- 
poses of  this  Act,  be  deemed  to  continue  to  be  the  em- 
ployer of  the  workman  whilst  he  is  working  for  that  other 
person ; 

"  Workman  "  does  not  include  any  person  employed  otherwise 
than  by  way  of  manual  labour  whose  remuneration  exceeds 
two  hundred  and  fifty  pounds  a  year,  or  a  person  whose 
employment  is  of  a  casual  nature  and  who  is  employed 
otherwise  than  for  the  purposes  of  the  employer's  trade  or 
business,  or  a  member  of  a  police  force,  or  an  outworker, 
or  a  member  of  the  employer's  family  dwelling  in  his  house, 
but,  save  as  aforesaid,  means  any  person  who  has  entered 
into  or  works  under  a  contract  of  service  or  apprenticeship 
with  an  employer,  whether  by  way  of  manual  labour,  clerical 
work,  or  otherwise,  and  whether  the  contract  is  expressed 
or  implied,  is  oral  or  in  writing ; 

Any  reference  to  a  workman  who  has  been  injured  shall,  where 
the  workman  is  dead,  include  a  reference  to  his  legal  per- 
sonal representative  or  to  his  dependants  or  other  person 
to  whom  or  for  whose  benefit  compensation  is  payable ; 

"  Dependants "  means  such  of  the  members  of  the  work- 
man's family  as  were  wholly  or  in  part  dependent  upon 
the  earnings  of  the  workman  at  the  time  of  his  death,  or 
would  but  for  the  incapacity  due  to  the  accident  have  been 
so  dependent,  and  where  the  workman,  being  the  parent 
or  grandparent  of  an  illegitimate  child,  leaves  such  a 
child  so  dependent  upon  his  earnings,  or,  being  an  illegit- 
imate child,  leaves  a  parent  or  grandparent  so  dependent 
upon  his  earnings,  shall  include  such  an  illegitimate  child 
and  parent  or  grandparent  respectively  ; 

"  Member  of  a  family  "  means  wife  or  husband,  father,  mother, 
grandfather,  grandmother,  step-father,  step-mother,  son, 
daughter,  grandson,  granddaughter,  step-son,  step-daughter, 
brother,  sister,  half-brother,  half-sister ; 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  6$ 

"Ship,"  "vessel,"  "seaman,"  and  "port"  have  the  same 
meanings  as  in  the  Merchant  Shipping  Act,    1894; 

"  Manager,"  in  relation  to  a  ship,  means  the  ship's  husband 
or  other  person  to  whom  the  management  of  the  ship  is 
entrusted  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  owner ; 

"  Police  force  "  means  a  police  force  to  which  the  Police  Act, 
i8go,  or  the  Police  (Scotland)  Act,  1890,  applies,  the  City 
of  London  Police  Force,  the  Royal  Irish  Constabulary,  and 
the  Dublin  Metropolitan  Police  P'orce ; 

"  Outworker  "  means  a  person  to  whom  articles  or  materials 
are  given  out  to  be  made  up,  cleaned,  washed,  altered, 
ornamented,  finished,  or  repaired,  or  adapted  for  sale,  in 
his  own  home  or  on  other  premises  not  under  the  control 
or  management  of  the  person  who  gave  out  the  materials 
or  articles; 

The  exercise  and  performance  of  the  powers  and  duties  of  a 
local  or  other  public  authority  shall,  for  the  purposes  of  this 
Act,  be  treated  as  the  trade  or  business  of  the  authority ; 

"  County  court,"  "  judge  of  the  county  court,"  "  registrar  of 
the  county  court,"  "  plaintiff,"  and  "  rules  of  court,"  as 
respects  Scotland,  mean  respectively  sheriff  court,  sheriff, 
sheriff  clerk,  pursuer,  and  act  of  sederunt. 

14.   Special  Provisions  as  to  Scotland 

In  Scotland,  where  a  workman  raises  an  action  against  his  em- 
ployer independently  of  this  Act  in  respect  of  any  injury  caused 
by  accident  arising  out  of  and  in  the  course  of  the  employment, 
the  action,  if  raised  in  the  sheriff  court  and  concluding  for  damages 
under  the  Employers'  Liability  Act,  1880,  or  alternatively  at  com- 
mon law  or  under  the  Employers'  Liability  Act,  1880,  shall,  not- 
withstanding anything  contained  in  that  Act,  not  be  removed  under 
that  Act  or  otherwise  to  the  Court  of  Session,  nor  shall  it  be  ap- 
pealed to  that  court  otherwise  than  by  appeal  on  a  question  of  law  ; 
and  for  the  purposes  of  such  appeal  the  provisions  of  the  Second 


66  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Schedule  to  this  Act  in  regard  to  an  appeal  from  the  decision  of 
the  sheriff  on  any  question  of  law  determined  by  him  as  arbitrator 
under  this  Act  shall  apply. 

75.  Provisions  as  to  existing  Contracts  and  Schemes 

(i)  Any  contract  (other  than  a  contract  substituting  the  provi- 
sions of  a  scheme  certified  under  the  Workmen's  Compensation 
Act,  1S97,  for  the  provisions  of  that  Act)  existing  at  the  com- 
mencement of  this  Act,  whereby  a  workman  relinquishes  any 
right  to  compensation  from  the  employer  for  personal  injury  aris- 
ing out  of  and  in  the  course  of  his  employment,  shall  not,  for  the 
purposes  of  this  Act,  be  deemed  to  continue  after  the  time  at  which 
the  workman's  contract  of  service  would  determine  if  notice  of  the 
determination  thereof  were  given  at  the  commencement  of  this  Act. 

(2)  Every  scheme  under  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act, 
1897,  in  force  at  the  commencement  of  this  Act  shall,  if  re-certi- 
fied by  the  Registrar  of  Friendly  Societies,  have  effect  as  if  it  were 
a  scheme  under  this  Act. 

(3)  The  Registrar  shall  re-certify  any  such  scheme  if  it  is  proved 
to  his  satisfaction  that  the  scheme  conforms,  or  has  been  so  modi- 
fied as  to  conform,  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act  as  to  schemes. 

(4)  If  any  such  scheme  has  not  been  so  re-certified  before  the 
expiration  of  six  months  from  the  commencement  of  this  Act,  the 
certificate  thereof  shall  be  revoked. 

16.    Commencement  and  Repeal 

(i)  This  Act  shall  come  into  operation  on  the  first  day  of  July 
1907,  but,  except  so  far  as  it  relates  to  references  to  medical  referees, 
and  proceedings  consequential  thereon,  shall  not  apply  in  any  case 
where  the  accident  happened  before  the  commencement  of  this  Act. 

(2)  The  Workmen's  Compensation  Acts,  1897  and  1900,  are 
hereby  repealed,  but  shall  continue  to  apply  to  cases  where  the 
accident  happened  before  the  commencement  of  this  Act,  except 
to  the  extent  to  which  this  Act  applies  to  those  cases. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  6/ 

//.   Short  Title 
This  Act  may  be  cited  as  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act,  1906. 

First  Schedule 

Scale  and  Conditions  of  Cotnpensation 

(i)  The  amount  of  compensation  under  this  Act  shall  be  — 
(a)  Where  death  results  from  the  injury  — 

(i)  if  the  workman  leaves  any  dependants  wholly  de- 
pendent upon  his  earnings,  a  sum  equal  to  his 
earnings  in  the  employment  of  the  same  em- 
ployer during  the  three  years  next  preceding 
the  injury,  or  the  sum  of  one  hundred  and  fifty 
pounds,  whichever  of  those  sums  is  the  larger, 
but  not  exceeding  in  any  case  three  hundred 
pounds,  provided  that  the  amount  of  any  weekly 
payments  made  under  this  Act,  and  any  lump 
sum  paid  in  redemption  thereof,  shall  be  de- 
ducted from  such  sum,  and,  if  the  period  of  the 
workman's  employment  by  the  said  employer 
has  been  less  than  the  said  three  years,  then  the 
amount  of  his  earnings  during  the  said  three 
years  shall  be  deemed  to  be  one  hundred  and 
fifty-six  times  his  average  weekly  earnings  dur- 
ing the  period  of  his  actual  employment  under 
the  said  employer ; 
(ii)  if  the  workman  does  not  leave  any  such  dependants, 
but  leaves  any  dependants  in  part  dependent  upon 
his  earnings,  such  sum,  not  exceeding  in  any  case 
the  amount  payable  under  the  foregoing  provi- 
sions, as  may  be  agreed  upon,  or,  in  default  of 
agreement,  may  be  determined,  on  arbitration 
under  this  Act,  to  be  reasonable  and  proportion- 
ate to  the  injury  to  the  said  dependants;  and 


68  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(iii)  if  he  leaves  no  dependants,  the  reasonable  expenses 
of  his  medical  attendance  and  burial,  not  exceed- 
ing ten  pounds ; 
(p)  where  total  or  partial  incapacity  for  work  results  from 
the  injury,  a  weekly  payment  during  the  incapacity  not 
exceeding  fifty  per  cent  of  his  average  weekly  earnings 
during  the  previous  twelve  months,  if  he  has  been  so 
long  employed,  but  if  not  then  for  any  less  period  dur- 
ing which  he  has  been  in  the  employment  of  the  same 
employer,  such  weekly  payment  not  to  exceed  one  pound: 
Provided  that  — 

(^7)  if  the  incapacity  lasts  less  than  two  weeks  no 

compensation  shall  be  payable  in  respect  of 

the  first  week ;  and 

(b)  as  respects  the  weekly  payments  during  total 

incapacity  of   a   workman  who   is   under 

twenty-one  years  of  age  at  the  date  of  the 

injury,  and  whose  average  weekly  earnings 

are  less  than  twenty  shillings,  one  hundred 

per  cent  shall  be  substituted  for  fifty  per 

cent  of  his  average  weekly  earnings,  but 

the  weekly  payment  shall  in  no  case  exceed 

ten  shillings. 

(2)  For  the  purposes  of  the  provisions  of  this  schedule  relating 

to  "  earnings  "  and  "  average  weekly  earnings  "  of  a  workman,  the 

following  rules  shall  be  observed  : 

(a)  average  weekly  earnings  shall  be  computed  in  such  manner 
as  is  best  calculated  to  give  the  rate  per  week  at  which 
the  workman  was  being  remunerated.  Provided  that 
where  by  reason  of  the  shortness  of  the  time  during 
which  the  workman  has  been  in  the  employment  of  his 
employer,  or  the  casual  nature  of  the  employment,  or  the 
terms  of  the  employment,  it  is  impracticable  at  the  date 
of  the  accident  to  compute  the  rate  of  remuneration, 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  69 

regard  may  be  had  to  the  average  weekly  amount  which, 
during  the  twelve  months  previous  to  the  accident,  was 
being  earned  by  a  person  in  the  same  grade  employed 
at  the  same  work  by  the  same  employer,  or,  if  there  is 
no  person  so  employed,  by  a  person  in  the  same  grade 
employed  in  the  same  class  of  employment  and  in  the 
same  district ; 
(/;)  where  the  workman  had  entered  into  concurrent  contracts 
of  service  with  two  or  more  employers  under  which  he 
worked  at  one  time  for  one  such  employer  and  at  another 
time  for  another  such  employer,  his  average  weekly  earn- 
ings shall  be  computed  as  if  his  earnings  under  all  such 
contracts  were  earnings  in  the  employment  of  the  em- 
ployer for  whom  he  was  working  at   the  time  of  the 
accident ; 
(/)  employment  by  the  same  employer  shall  be  taken  to  mean 
employment  by  the  same  employer  in  the  grade  in  which 
the  workman  was  employed  at  the  time  of  the  accident, 
uninterrupted  by  absence  from  work  due  to  illness  or  any 
other  unavoidable  cause ; 
(d)  where  the  employer  has  been  accustomed  to  pay  to  the 
workman  a  sum  to  cover  any  special  expenses  entailed  on 
him  by  the  nature  of  his  employment,  the  sum  so  paid 
shall  not  be  reckoned  as  part  of  the  earnings. 
(3)  In  fixing  the  amount  of  the  weekly  payment,  regard  shall  be 
had  to  any  payment,  allowance,  or  benefit  which  the  workman  may 
receive  from  the  employer  during  the  period  of  his  incapacity,  and 
in  the  case  of  partial  incapacity  the  weekly  payment  shall  in  no 
case  exceed  the  difference  between  the  amount  of  the  average 
weekly  earnings  of  the  workman  before  the  accident  and  the  aver- 
age weekly  amount  which  he  is  earning  or  is  able  to  earn  in  some 
suitable  employment  or  business  after  the  accident,  but  shall  bear 
such  relation  to  the  amount  of  that  difference  as  under  the  circum- 
stances of  the  case  may  appear  proper. 


70  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(4)  Where  a  workman  has  given  notice  of  an  accident,  he  shall, 
if  so  required  by  the  employer,  submit  himself  for  examination  by 
a  duly  qualified  medical  practitioner  provided  and  paid  by  the  em- 
ployer, and,  if  he  refuses  to  submit  himself  to  such  examination, 
or  in  any  way  obstructs  the  same,  his  right  to  compensation,  and 
to  take  or  prosecute  any  proceeding  under  this  Act  in  relation  to 
compensation,  shall  be  suspended  until  such  examination  has  taken 
place. 

(5)  The  pa3m:ient  in  the  case  of  death  shall,  unless  otherwise 
ordered  as  herein-after  provided,  be  paid  into  the  county  court, 
and  any  sum  so  paid  into  court  shall,  subject  to  rules  of  court  and 
the  provisions  of  this  schedule,  be  invested,  applied,  or  otherwise 
dealt  with  by  the  court  in  such  manner  as  the  court  in  its  discretion 
thinks  fit  for  the  benefit  of  the  persons  entitled  thereto  under  this 
Act,  and  the  receipt  of  the  registrar  of  the  court  shall  be  a  sufficient 
discharge  in  respect  of  the  amount  paid  in : 

Provided  that,  if  so  agreed,  the  payment  in  case  of  death  shall, 
if  the  workman  leaves  no  dependants,  be  made  to  his  legal  personal 
representative,  or,  if  he  has  no  such  representative,  to  the  person 
to  whom  the  expenses  of  medical  attendance  and  burial  are  due. 

[6-22.    Various  administrative  details  omitted.] 


Second  Schedule 

Arbitration,  etc. 

(i)  For  the  purpose  of  settling  any  matter  which  under  this  Act 
is  to  be  settled  by  arbitration,  if  any  committee,  representative  of 
an  employer  and  his  workmen,  exists  with  power  to  settle  matters 
under  this  Act  in  the  case  of  the  employer  and  workmen,  the 
matter  shall,  unless  either  party  objects  by  notice  in  writing  sent  to 
the  other  party  before  the  committee  meet  to  consider  the  matter, 
be  settled  by  the  arbitration  of  such  committee,  or  be  referred  by 
them  in  their  discretion  to  arbitration  as  herein-after  provided. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  71 

(2)  If  either  party  so  objects,  or  there  is  no  such  committee, 
or  the  committee  so  refers  the  matter  or  fails  to  settle  the  matter 
within  six  months  from  the  date  of  the  claim,  the  matter  shall  be 
settled  by  a  single  arbitrator  agreed  on  by  the  parties,  or  in  the 
absence  of  agreement  by  the  judge  of  the  county  court,  according 
to  the  procedure  prescribed  by  rules  of  court. 

(3)  In  England  the  matter,  instead  of  being  settled  by  the 
county  court,  may,  if  the  Lord  Chancellor  so  authorises,  be  settled 
according  to  the  like  procedure,  by  a  single  arbitrator  appointed  by 
that  judge,  and  the  arbitrator  so  appointed  shall,  for  the  purposes 
of  this  Act,  have  all  the  powers  of  that  judge. 

(4)  The  Arbitration  Act,  1889,  shall  not  apply  to  any  arbitration 
under  this  Act ;  but  a  committee  or  an  arbitrator  may,  if  they  or 
he  think  fit,  submit  any  question  of  law  for  the  decision  of  the 
judge  of  the  county  court,  and  the  decision  of  the  judge  on  any 
question  of  law,  either  on  such  submission,  or  in  any  case  where 
he  himself  settles  the  matter  under  this  Act,  or  where  he  gives  any 
decision  or  makes  any  order  under  this  Act,  shall  be  final,  unless 
within  the  time  and  in  accordance  with  the  conditions  prescribed 
by  rules  of  the  Supreme  Court  either  party  appeals  to  the  Court 
of  Appeal ;  and  the  judge  of  the  county  court,  or  the  arbitrator 
appointed  by  him,  shall,  for  the  purpose  of  proceedings  under  this 
Act,  have  the  same  powers  of  procuring  the  attendance  of  witnesses 
and  the  production  of  documents  as  if  the  proceedings  were  an 
action  in  the  county  court. 

(5)  A  judge  of  county  courts  may,  if  he  thinks  fit,  summon  a 
medical  referee  to  sit  with  him  as  an  assessor. 

(6)  Rules  of  court  may  make  provision  for  the  appearance  in 
any  arbitration  under  this  Act  of  any  party  by  some  other  person. 

(7)  The  costs  of  and  incidental  to  the  arbitration  and  proceed- 
ings connected  therewith  shall  be  in  the  discretion  of  the  committee, 
arbitrator,  or  judge  of  the  county  court,  subject  as  respects  such 
judge  and  an  arbitrator  appointed  by  him  to  rules  of  court.  The 
costs,  whether  before  a  committee  or  an  arbitrator  or  in  the  county 


72 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


court,  shall  not  exceed  the  limit  prescribed  by  rules  of  court,  and 
shall  be  taxed  in  manner  prescribed  by  those  rules  and  such  taxa- 
tion may  be  reviewed  by  the  judge  of  the  county  court. 
[8-18.    Various  details  omitted.] 

Third  Schedule 


Description  of  Disease 

Description  of  Process 

Anthrax 

Handling    of    wool,    hair,    bristles, 
hides,  and  skins. 

Lead  poisoning  or  its  sequelae  .    .    . 

Any  process  involving  the  use  of 

lead  or  its  preparations  or  com- 

pounds. 

Mercury  poisoning  or  its  sequelae   . 

Any  process  involving  the  use  of 

mercury    or   its    preparations    or 

compounds. 

Phosphorus  poisoning  or  its  sequelae 

Any  process  involving  the  use  of 

phosphorus  or  its  preparations  or 

compounds. 

Arsenic  poisoning  or  its  sequelae     . 

Any  process  involving  the  use  of 

arsenic  or  its  preparations  or  com- 

pounds. 

Ankylostomiasis 

Mining. 

Extract  11 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  (ANGLO-FRENCH 
CONVENTION)  ACT,  1909 

(p  Ediv.  7,  cJi.  i6) 

An  Act  to  authorise  the  making  of  such  modifications  in  the  Work- 
men's Compensation  Act,  1906,  in  its  application  to  French 
Citizens,  as  may  be  necessary  to  give  effect  to  a  Convention 
between  His  Majesty  and  the  President  of  the  French  Re- 
public. (20th  October  1909) 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  73 

Whereas  His  Majesty  the  King  and  the  President  of  the  French 
Republic  have  concluded  the  Convention  set  out  in  the  Schedule 
to  this  Act,  but  effect  cannot  be  given  to  the  Convention  unless 
certain  modifications  are  made  in  the  Workmen's  Compensation 
Act,  1906,  so  far  as  it  applies  to  workmen  who  are  French  citizens. 

Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty, 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and 
Temporal,  and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled, 
and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 

I.  His  Majesty  may,  by  Order  in  Council,  make  such  modifica- 
tions in  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act,  1906,  in  its  application 
to  workmen  who  are  French  citizens,  as  appear  to  him  to  be  neces- 
sary to  give  effect  to  the  said  Convention  ;  and  the  Workmen's 
Compensation  Act,  1906,  shall  apply  to  such  workmen,  subject  to 
the  modifications  contained  in  the  Order. 

n.  This  Act  may  be  cited  as  the  Workmen's  Compensation 
(Anglo-French  Convention)  Act,  1909. 

Schedule 

Convention  signed  at  Paris  the  jrd  day  of  July  igog 

Article  i 

British  subjects  who  meet  with  accidents  arising  out  of  their 
employment  as  workmen  in  France,  and  persons  entitled  to  claim 
through  or  having  rights  derivable  from  them,  shall  enjoy  the  bene- 
fits of  the  compensation  and  guarantees  secured  to  French  citizens 
by  the  legislation  in  force  in  France  in  regard  to  the  liabilit}'  of 
employers  in  respect  of  such  accidents. 

Reciprocally,  French  citizens  who  meet  with  accidents  arising 
out  of  their  employment  as  workmen  in  the  United  Kingdom  of 
Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  and  persons  entitled  to  claim  through  or 
having  rights  derivable  from  them,  shall  enjoy  the  benefits  of  the 
compensation  and  guarantees  secured  to  British  subjects  by  the 


74  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

legislation  in  force  in  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland  in  regard  to  compensation  for  such  accidents,  supplemented 
as  specified  in  Article  5. 

Article  2 

Nevertheless,  the  present  Convention  shall  not  apply  to  the  case 
of  a  person  engaged  in  a  business  having  its  headquarters  in  one 
of  the  two  Contracting  States,  but  temporarily  detached  for  em- 
ployment in  the  other  Contracting  State,  and  meeting  with  an  acci- 
dent in  the  course  of  that  employment,  if  at  the  time  of  the  accident 
the  said  employment  has  lasted  less  than  six  months.  In  this  case 
the  persons  interested  shall  only  be  entitled  to  the  compensation 
and  guarantees  provided  by  the  law  of  the  former  State. 

The  same  rule  shall  apply  in  the  case  of  persons  engaged  in 
transport  services  and  employed  at  intervals,  whether  regular  or 
not,  in  the  country  other  than  that  in  which  the  headquarters  of 
the  business  are  established. 

Article  3 

The  British  and  French  authorities  will  reciprocally  lend  their 
good  offices  to  facilitate  the  administration  of  their  respective  laws 
as  aforesaid. 

Article  4 

The  present  Convention  shall  be  ratified,  and  the  ratifications 
shall  be  exchanged  at  Paris,  as  soon  as  possible. 

It  shall  be  applicable  in  France  and  in  the  United  Kingdom  of 
Great  Britain  and  Ireland  to  all  accidents  happening  after  one 
month  from  the  time  of  its  publication  in  the  two  countries  in 
the  manner  prescribed  by  their  respective  laws,  and  it  shall  remain 
binding  until  the  expiration  of  one  year  from  the  date  on  which  it 
shall  have  been  denounced  by  one  or  other  of  the  two  Contracting 
Parties. 


WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  75 

Article  5 

Nevertheless,  the  ratification  mentioned  in  the  preceding  Article 
shall  not  take  place  till  the  legislation  at  present  in  force  in  the 
United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  in  regard  to  work- 
men's compensation  has  been  supplemented,  so  far  as  concerns 
accidents  to  French  citizens  arising  out  of  their  employment  as 
workmen,  by  arrangements  to  the  following  effect : 

(a)  That  the  compensation  payable  shall  in  every  case  be  fixed 

by  an  award  of  the  County  Court : 
(J>)  That  in  any  case  of  redemption  of  weekly  payments  the  total 
sum  payable  shall,  provided  it  exceeds  a  sum  equivalent  to 
the  capital  value  of  an  annuity  of  4/.  (100  fr.),  be  paid 
into  Court,  to  be  employed  in  the  purchase  of  an  annuity 
for  the  benefit  of  the  person  entitled  thereto : 
{c)  That  in  those  cases  in  which  a  lump  sum  representing  the 
compensation  payable  shall  have  been  paid  by  the  em- 
ployer into  the  County  Court,  if  the  injured  workman 
returns  to  reside  in  France,  or  if  the  dependants  resided 
in  France  at  the  time  of  his  death  or  subsequently  return 
to  reside  in  France,  the  total  sum  due  to  the  injured  work- 
man or  to  his  dependants  shall  be  paid  over  through  the 
County  Court  to  the  Caisse  Nationah  Fran^aise  des  Re- 
traites  pour  la  Vieillesse,  who  shall  employ  it  in  the  pur- 
chase of  an  annuity  according  to  its  tariff  at  the  time  of 
the  payment ;  and  further,  that,  in  the  case  in  which  a 
lump  sum  shall  not  have  been  paid  into  Court,  and  the 
injured  workman  returns  to  reside  in  France,  the  com- 
pensation shall  be  remitted  to  him  through  the  County 
Court  at  such  intervals  and  in  such  way  as  may  be  agreed 
upon  by  the  competent  authorities  of  the  two  countries : 
(d)  That  in  respect  of  all  the  acts  done  by  the  County  Court 
in  pursuance  of  the  legislation  in  regard  to  workmen's 
compensation,  as  well  as  in  the  execution  of  the  present 


76  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Convention,  French  citizens  shall  be  exempt  from  all 
expenses  and  fees : 
(<?)  That  at  the  beginning  of  each  year  His  Majesty's  principal 
Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home  Department  will  send  to 
the  Departejnent  dii  Travail  et  de  la  Prevoyance  sociale  a 
record  of  all  judicial  decisions  given  in  the  course  of  the 
preceding  year  under  the  legislation  in  regard  to  work- 
men's compensation  in  the  case  of  French  citizens  injured 
by  accident  in  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland. 


CHAPTER  II 

TRADE  UNIONISM 

[In  1906  there  were  1200  unions  in  Great  Britain  with  a  total 
membership  of  2,113,806.  They  were  recognised  as  legal  associa- 
tions by  virtue  of  statutes  enacted  between  1871  and  1876,  but 
the  Taff  Vale  judgment  had  recently  decided  that  they  were  cor- 
porations which  could  be  sued  with  costs  and  damages  for  the  ac- 
tion of  any  of  their  agents  whenever  such  action  had  caused  loss 
to  other  persons.  How  Mr.  Balfour's  Government  failed  in  1905 
to  pass  into  law  a  bill  to  protect  the  funds  of  the  trade  unions, 
which  had  been  placed  in  jeopardy  by  that  celebrated  decision,  has 
already  been  noted. ^  The  judgment  seriously  threatened  the  future 
welfare  of  trade  unionism  because,  with  the  financial  danger  ever 
before  them,  many  workmen  lost  confidence  in  it. 

One  of  the  first  steps  taken,  therefore,  by  the  new  Liberal  Gov- 
ernment was  to  present  a  measure  intended  to  reverse  the  Taff 
Vale  judgment  and  to  allow  ^reasonable  liber^tyJo_yie_iXQiQnsJrL-the 
matter  of  "picketing."  The  bill  was  introduced  in  the  House  of 
Commons  on  March  28,  1906,  by  Sir  John  Walton,  the  Attorney- 
General  {Extract  12),  and  was  read  a  first  time  after  a  short  de- 
bate, in  which  several  Labour  members  expressed  a  strong  prefer- 
ence for  a  solution  of  their  own ;  and  Sir  Exiward  Carson,  Lord 
Robert  Cecil,  and  other  staunch  Conservatives  protested  against 
provisions  tending  to  convert  trade  unions  into  what  they  described 
as  a  privileged  class. 

The  Government  proposed  to  limit  the  liability  of  trade  union 
funds  for  damages  to  cases  where  the  act  complained  of  was  that 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  13. 
77 


78  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  the  executive  committee  of  a  union  or  of  its  authorised  agent 
acting  in  accordance  with  its  express  or  implied  orders,  or,  at  least, 
not  contravening  them.  The  Labour  members,  however,  preferred 
that  trade  unions  should  not  in  any  case  be  actionable  for  damages 
sustained  through  the  conduct  of  their  members,  and  a  Bill  em- 
bodying this  provision  was  brought  forward  for  second  reading  by 
Mr.  W.  Hudson,  one  of  their  number,  representing  Newcastle-on- 
Tyne.  It  was  strongly  opposed  by  Mr.  F.  E.  Smith,  who  denied 
that  trade  unions  had  ever  enjoyed  the  immunity  now  claimed  for 
them  and  protested  vigorously  against  the  Bill  as  creating  a  class 
privilege.  Mr.  Keir  Hardie,  supporting  the  Labour  Bill,  put  the 
difference  between  the  Labour  and  the  Ministerial  measures  neatly 
by  declaring  that  trade  unionists  would  not  be  satisfied  with  mere 
barbed-wire  entanglements  for  the  protection  of  their  funds,  but 
would  insist  upon  their  removal  out  of  the  range  of  the  ene- 
mies' guns.  The  Prime  Minister,  after  declaring  that  the  suspicion 
formerly  entertained  of  trade  unions  had  given  place  to  a  general 
recognition  that  they  were  beneficial  institutions,  said  that  he  had 
voted  two  or  three  times  previously  for  Bills  on  the  lines  of  that 
now  under  discussion,  and  he  proposed  to  vote  for  the  Labour 
Bill.  This  announcement  was  loudly  cheered  by  the  Labour  mem- 
bers, and  the  Prime  Minister  proceeded  to  argue  that  the  dif- 
ference between  the  two  bills  was  one  of  method  rather  than  of 
principle.  Subsequently,  after  application  of  the  closure,  the  second 
reading  of  the  Labour  measure  was  passed  by  416  to  66,  several 
Ministers  and  some  sixty  or  seventy  other  Liberals  not  voting. 

The  original  Government  Bill  was  read  a  second  time  on  April  25. 
During  the  Committee  Stage,  the  Attorney-General  moved,  on 
August  3,  the  addition  of  the  special  clause  which  had  charac- 
terised the  Labour  Bill,  prohibiting  actions  against  unions,  whether 
of  workmen  or  masters,  for  the  recovery  of  damages  in  respect  of 
tortious  acts.  On  the  new  clause  Sir  Edward  Carson  suggested 
that  it  might  have  run  :  "  The  king  can  do  no  wrong ;  neither  can 
trades  unions."    The  Attorney-General  defended  the  change  at 


TRADE  UNIONISM  79 

length,  and,  after  a  number  of  legal  members  had  spoken,  the 
clause  was  agreed  to  by  257  to  29  and  the  Bill  was  reported  as 
amended  —  the  Labour  members'  alternative  Bill  of  course  having 
been  dropped. 

The  Bill  passed  through  the  various  later  stages  against  no  little 
opposition,  especially  among  the  Lords,  and  finally  received  the 
royal  assent  on  December  21.  It  was  repeatedly  affirmed  that  the 
Lords  would  have  rejected  the  Bill  altogether  had  they  not  feared 
the  cumulative  effect  on  the  country  of  their  rejection,  in  the  same 
year,  of  the  Education  Bill  and  the  Plural  Voting  Bill. 

The  Trade  Unions  and  Trade  Disputes  Act,  in  its  final  form,  is 
given  as  Extract  ij.  For  convenience  of  reference,  important  por- 
tions of  the  Trade  Union  Acts,  187 1  and  1876,  and  of  the  Con- 
spiracy and  Protection  of  Property  Act,  1875,  are  inserted  as 
Extracts  14,  75,  and  16,  respectively. 

It  may  be  well  to  state  at  this  point  that  trade  unionism  was 
subsequently  affected  by  another  remarkable  judicial  decision  — 
the  celebrated  Osborne  judgment,  handed  down  by  the  House  of 
Lords  on  December  21,  1909,  the  effect  of  which  was  to  make  it 
illegal  to  use  the  moneys  of  any  trade  union  for  paying  members 
of  Parliament.  It  had  always  been  customary  in  the  LTnited  King- 
dom not  to  salary  members  of  Parliament,  with  the  result  that  the 
poor  man  had  been  either  excluded  from  the  House  of  Commons 
altogether  or  forced  to  accept  financial  aid  from  constituents  or 
special  friends.  The  greater  number  of  the  Labour  members  who 
entered  the  House  in  igo6  owed  their  places  to  funds  advanced  by 
workingmen,  especially  by  trade  unions.  In  consequence  of  the 
Osborne  judgment,  the  Labour  party  felt  that  their  very  existence 
was  imperilled,  but  the  Liberal  Government  reassured  them  in  part 
by  securing  statutory  payment  of  all  members  (^400  per  annum), 
beginning  in  191 1.  In  Extract  ly  are  parts  of  two  speeches  deliv- 
ered in  the  course  of  the  debate  on  the  payment  of  members,  the 
one  by  Mr.  Arthur  Lee,  a  strong  Conservative  opponent,  and  the 
other  by  Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald,  the  Labour  leader.] 


8o  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  12 

INTRODUCTION  OF  TRADE   UNIONS   AND   TRADE 
DISPUTES   BILL 

{Sir  John  Walton^  Attorney-General,  Commons^  Ma?'ch  28,  igo6) 

Sir  John  Walton  -^ :  .  .  .  In  their  early  days  trade  unions  had 
to  struggle  against  the  ban  of  common  law  and  repressive  statutes. 
They  were  organisations  which  interfered  with  the  perfect  free- 
dom of  relationship  between  employers  and  employed  and  the  free 
course  of  trade,  and  until  a  very  recent  period  of  our  history  this 
difficulty  prevented  any  large  extension  of  this  industrial  movement. 
In  1824  and  1825  repressive  legislation  disappeared ;  and  in  1859 
a  declaration  was  made  giving  to  these  societies  the  right  to  exer- 
cise the  faculty  of  persuasion,  provided  they  did  so  in  a  reasonable 
and  peaceful  manner.  In  1867  the  pulse  of  the  democracy  was 
quickened  by  the  Borough  Franchise  Act  of  that  year,  with  the 
result  that  we  had  a  Royal  Commission  followed  by  the  charter  of 
trade  unionism  of  1 8  7 1 ,  afterwards  amplified  and  expanded  by  the 
supplementary  Act  of  1875.  It  is  true  that  the  legislation  of  187 1 
and  1875  was  limited  in  its  scope.  Its  main  aim  was  to  remove 
the  ban  of  the  common  law  and  the  stigma  of  illegality  from  the 
operations  of  these  bodies.  It  enabled  them  to  register  themselves, 
to  frame  rules,  to  amass  property,  to  appoint  agents,  and  to  defend 
themselves  and  their  funds  from  attack.  It  also  created  an  impor- 
tant declaration  limiting  their  criminal  liability  to  those  Acts  only 
which  are  criminal  if  committed  by  individuals. 

But  in  regard  to  their  responsibility  to  the  civil  law,  legislation 
is  absolutely  silent.  That  silence  has  led  to  serious  controversy  in 
determining  the  aim  of  Parliament  in  connection  with  that  legisla- 
tion. The  House  of  Lords,  which  is  the  authoritative  exponent  of 
our  law,  and  binds  the  High  Court  of  Parliament  as  it  binds  every 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  154,  col.  1295  sqq. 


TRADE  UNIONISM  8l 

other  Court  in  the  reahn,  has  pointed  out  that  that  silence  does 
not  disturb  the  liability  under  which  these  unions  rested  under  the 
common  law  of  the  country,  that  the  fact  of  registration  made  them 
suable  in  respect  of  wrongful  conduct  in  the  name  of  the  organisa- 
tion which  was  placed  on  the  register,  and  that  since  the  year  1883 
the  amalgamation  of  our  systems  of  judicature  as  they  existed  under 
the  common  law  and  in  Courts  of  equity  made  that  liability  enforce- 
able by  a  form  of  action  which  up  to  that  moment  was  only  known 
in  the  Courts  of  Chancery. 

The  period  of  thirty  years  between  187 1  and  1901  was  a  period 
of  great  material  prosperity  in  regard  to  these  unions.  Their  num- 
bers increased,  their  branches  spread,  their  wealth  grew.  The  funds 
which  were  available  to  meet  claims  that  might  be  made  upon  them 
induced  actions  to  be  brought  in  numerous  quarters  for  the  purpose 
of  satisfying  claims  for  redress  for  injuries  attributed  to  conduct  of 
which  members  of  the  community  complained,  and  from  1892  on- 
ward a  series  of  actions  were  successfully  tried  which  at  first  took 
the  form  of  actions  for  injunctions  and  afterwards  of  actions  for 
damages.  It  is  impossible  to  say  that  the  result  of  this  litigation 
did  not  create  a  serious  situation.  Trade  unions  are  institutions 
which  consist  of  the  working-classes.  Their  funds  represent  the 
hard-earned  savings  of  a  large  and  most  worthy  section  of  the 
community,  and  they  have  been  contributed  in  no  small  degree  for 
the  purpose  of  making  provision  against  misfortune.  This  liabil- 
ity and  its  consequences  have  created  a  problem  with  which  it  is 
necessary  that  Parliament  should  deal,  and  which  the  Government 
have  done  their  best  to  solve.  In  our  opinion  the  law  needs  most 
careful  examination,  redefinition,  and  modification,  and  some  of  the 
general  principles  of  the  law  require  regulation  in  their  application 
to  these  bodies. 

In  the  first  place,  let  me  call  attention  to  the  law  of  conspiracy. 
The  expression  "  conspiracy  "  is  a  little  apt  to  shake  timid  nerves, 
and  to  suggest  periods  of  our  history  when  our  Constitution  was 
unstable  and  when  sinister  designs  against  the  Crown  and  society 


82  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

were  incidents  of  our  public  life.  But  conspiracy  in  law  simply 
means  combination  to  violate  the  rights  of  another.  Combination  is 
a  conspiracy  or  agreement,  and  the  fact  that  its  object  is  to  violate 
a  right,  constitutes  it  a  criminal  act  and  makes  it  subject  to  a  claim 
for  damages  on  the  part  of  the  person  whose  right  has  been  vio- 
lated by  the  act  so  committed.  This  is  a  part  of  our  law  which  I 
may  describe  as  one  of  the  blank  spaces  upon  the  juridical  map. 
There  are  a  few  rough  tracks  across  it  emanating  from  different 
sources,  and  generally  leading  to  different  results.  The  wary  and 
prudent  litigant  gives  it  as  wide  a  berth  as  possible  because  it  is  the 
region  of  judge-made  law ;  and  when  he  is  once  lost  in  that  area 
it  is  not  easy  for  him  always  to  know  exactly  where  he  is  or  by 
what  means  he  will  escape  from  it. 

We  propose  that  this  region  shall  be  carefully  plotted  out,  that 
its  frontiers  shall  be  limited,  and  that  there  shall  be  carried  through 
it  a  statutory  highway  which,  so  far,  at  any  rate,  as  these  organisa- 
tions are  concerned,  may  be  safely  travelled  by  the  most  unwary 
traveller.  The  legislation  of  1875,  while  it  defined  the  law  of  con- 
spiracy in  its  criminal  aspect,  left  that  law,  in  so  far  as  it  is  a  de- 
partment of  civil  jurisprudence,  entirely  untouched  ;  and  the  result 
has  been  that  this  area  has  been  the  field  of  fierce  struggles  be- 
tween disputants  of  legal  eminence.  I  doubt  whether  in  our  time 
the  serene  judicial  atmosphere  has  ever  been  so  much  disturbed 
as  it  has  been  by  different  theories  with  regard  to  the  law  of 
conspiracy.  .  .  . 

We  propose  to  call  in  aid  the  principle  which  was  established  by 
the  Act  of  1875.  It  was  there  declared  that  the  character  of  an 
act  committed  by  a  trade  union  within  the  purview  of  the  criminal 
law  should  depend  on  the  consideration  of  whether  it  was  criminal 
or  not,  assuming  it  to  be  the  act  of  an  individual.  And  so  we 
say  in  regard  to  the  applications  of  the  civil  law,  that  that  act 
shall  be  right  or  wrong,  shall  be  lawful  or  unlawful,  according  as 
it  would  be  lawful  or  unlawful,  judged  on  the  assumption  that  it 
has  been  committed  by  an  individual  and  not  by  a  combination ; 


TRADE  UNIONISM  83 

and  I  submit  to  the  House  that  there  is  no  other  solution  than 
that  which  I  have  suggested. 

The  next  subject  upon  which  I  propose  to  say  a  few  words  is 
that  of  peaceful  picketing,  which  I  prefer  to  call  the  right  of  peace- 
ful persuasion.  What  is  the  right  of  peaceful  persuasion  ?  It  is  an 
essential  part  of  the  right  to  strike.  How  is  it  possible  to  strike 
unless  you  can  persuade  your  fellows  to  join  you  ?  How  is  it  pos- 
sible successfully  to  conduct  a  strike  unless  you  may  persuade  men 
who  are  introduced  from  a  distance  not  to  interfere  between  the 
strikers  and  their  employer  ?  The  right  to  persuade  those  who 
would  naturally  join  and  swell  your  ranks,  and  the  right  to  dissuade 
those  who  are  brought  in  with  a  view  to  prevent  the  success  of  a 
strike,  is  absolutely  essential  for  the  effective  conduct  of  an  opera- 
tion of  that  kind.  The  law  at  present  is  in  a  condition  that  I  think 
I  may  fairly  describe  as  impracticable,  if  not  absurd.  How  does  it 
stand  ?  It  is  held  to  be  perfectly  lawful  to  point  out  to  the  men 
what  are  the  poin.ts  of  difference.  You  may  either  ask  for  infor- 
mation with  regard  to  the  strike,  or  you  may  give  them  information 
with  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  conflict  between  the  workman  and 
the  employer.  But  if  you  go  one  step  further  and  so  present  the 
information  you  give  them  as  to  make  your  appeal  in  the  nature  of 
persuasion,  you  are  then  violating  the  law.  The  distinction  is  one 
which  a  legal  mind  may  grasp  ;  but  it  is  impossible  to  suppose  that 
the  distinction  can  be  grasped  by  any  advocate  of  a  trade  union 
who  endeavours  within  the  limits  of  the  law  as  it  now  stands  to 
give  information  to  persons  who  are  introduced  from  a  distance 
and  who  are  sought  to  be  employed  to  take  the  places  which  the 
strikers  have  vacated.  There  are  many  illustrations  in  the  decided 
cases  which  show  that  unless  this  part  of  the  law  is  altered  it  is 
impossible  to  conduct  a  strike  successfully. 

Further,  in  enacting,  as  we  purpose  to  enact  in  express  terms, 
the  right  peaceably  to  persuade,  we  are  not  calling  upon  the  House 
to  make  a  new  law.  We  are  only  reviving  a  law  which  is  as  old  as 
the  year  1859,  because  in  that  year  there  was  a  provision  put  into 


84  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  statute  upon  this  subject  which  was  then  passed,  which  attached 
an  interpretation  to  a  restrictive  provision  in  an  earlier  Act.  The 
statute  used  this  language.  It  provided  that  no  person  should, 
by  reason  merely  of  his  endeavouring  peaceably,  and  in  a  reason- 
able manner,  and  without  threats  and  intimidation,  direct  or  indi- 
rect, to  persuade,  be  deemed  guilty  of  molestation  or  obstruction 
within  the  meaning  of  the  Act  of  1825,  or  should,  therefore,  be 
subject  to  prosecution  or  indictment  for  conspiracy.  It  may  be  said 
that  the  Act  of  1875  repealed  the  Act  of  1859.  There  is  certainly 
no  indication  of  repeal  in  that  Act,  and  the  history  of  the  debates 
of  that  period  shows  that  it  was  thought  that  the  earlier  provision 
held  good.  Therefore,  in  regard  to  this  matter,  we  are  only  pro- 
posing to  ask  the  House  to  take  a  step  which  occurs  to  us  as  emi- 
nently reasonable,  as  representing  practical  justice,  and  one  which 
has  the  advantage  of  statutory  precedent.   .  .   . 

Let  me  summarise  in  a  word  or  two  what  we  contend  is  the 
result  of  all  this  legislation.  In  the  first  place,  we  remove  the  fet- 
ter which  is  placed  upon  the  operations  of  these  unions  by  the 
action  of  conspiracy.  We  give  them  permission,  so  long  as  they 
observe  the  law  as  it  affects  individuals,  to  carry  out  their  own 
policy  upon  lines  which  commend  themselves  to  their  favorable  con- 
sideration, and  we  allow  them  to  know  beforehand  whether  the 
conduct  which  they  propose  to  pursue  will  or  will  not  be  in  con- 
formity with  the  law.  In  the  second  place,  we  restore  and  give 
legislative  sanction  to  the  exercise  of  the  right  of  peaceful  per- 
suasion. In  the  third  place,  we  so  define  and  regulate  the  appli- 
cation of  the  law  of  agency  as  to  obviate  the  injustice  which  I 
have  indicated  and  given  illustrations  of.  We  do  that  first  of  all 
by  giving  to  each  of  these  unions  an  authoritative  and  articulate 
organ.  We  allow  them  to  speak  through  some  defined  agent.  We 
allow  them  to  delegate  their  authority  subject  to  certain  restric- 
tions. We  give  them  the  right  to  disapprove  of  or  repudiate  acts 
which  have  been  done  in  their  name  but  without  their  approval 
or  sanction. 


TRADE  UNIONISM  85 

I  think  that  when  this  Iiill  is  considered  by  the  House,  and  dis- 
passionately considered  by  every  section  of  this  House,  it  may  be 
regarded  as  a  satisfactory  solution  of  a  very  complicated  question. 
At  all  events  it  is  an  honest  attempt  to  solve  the  question.  We 
have  sought,  as  far  as  we  can,  to  do  what  we  consider  is  justice  to 
these  organisations  without  inflicting  injustice  upon  the  community 
at  large.  It  may  be  that  the  Bill  will  not  commend  itself  to  all 
sections  of  opinion  in  this  House.  It  is  very  seldom  that  Acts  of 
Parliament  do,  but  it  is  undoubtedly  the  fact  that  some  of  the 
statutes  which  have  been  most  successful  have  on  their  introduc- 
tion offended  Members  on  both  sides.  Compromise,  however,  is 
the  genius  of  politics,  although  it  is  not  a  very  pleasant  lesson  to 
learn.  .  .  . 

Extract  ij 

TRADE  DISPUTES  ACT,  1906 

{6  Edw.  7,  ch.  41) 

An  Act  to  provide  for  the  regulation  of  Trades  Unions  and  Trade 
Disputes.  (21st  December  1906) 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 

I.  Amendment  of  Forme?-  Act 

The  following  paragraph  shall  be  added  as  a  new  paragraph 
after  the  first  paragraph  of  section  three  of  the  Conspiracy  and 
Protection  of  Property  Act,  1875  : 

"  An  act  done  in  pursuance  of  an  agreement  or  combination  by 
two  or  more  persons  shall,  if  done  in  contemplation  or  furtherance 
of  a  trade  dispute,  not  be  actionable  unless  the  act,  if  done  with- 
out any  such  agreement  or  combination,  would  be  actionable." 


86  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

2.  Peaceful  Picketing 

(i)  It  shall  be  lawful  for  one  or  more  persons,  acting  on  their 
own  behalf  or  on  behalf  of  a  trade  union  or  of  an  individual  em- 
ployer or  firm  in  contemplation  or  furtherance  of  a  trade  dispute, 
to  attend  at  or  near  a  house  or  place  where  a  person  resides  or 
works  or  carries  on  business  or  happens  to  be,  if  they  so  attend 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  peacefully  obtaining  or  communicating 
information,  or  of  peacefully  persuading  any  person  to  work  or 
abstain  from  working. 

(2)  Section  seven  of  the  Conspiracy  and  Protection  of  Property 
Act,  1875,  is  hereby  repealed  from  "  attending  at  or  near"  to  the 
end  of  the  section. 

J.  Removal  of  Liability  for  Interfering  with  Another  Person^ s 
Business 

An  act  done  by  a  person  in  contemplation  or  furtherance  of  a 
trade  dispute  shall  not  be  actionable  on  the  ground  only  that  it  in- 
duces some  other  person  to  break  a  contract  of  employment  or 
that  it  is  an  interference  with  the  trade,  business,  or  employment 
of  some  other  person,  or  with  the  right  of  some  other  person  to 
dispose  of  his  capital  or  his  labour  as  he  wills. 

4.  Prohibition  of  Actions  of  Tort  against  Trade  Unions 

(i)  An  action  against  a  trade  union,  whether  of  workmen  or 
masters,  or  against  any  members  or  officials  thereof  on  behalf  of 
themselves  and  all  other  members  of  the  trade  union  in  respect  of 
any  tortious  act  alleged  to  have  been  committed  by  or  on  behalf 
of  the  trade  union,  shall  not  be  entertained  by  any  court. 

(2)  Nothing  in  this  section  shall  affect  the  liability  of  the  trustees 
of  a  trade  union  to  be  sued  in  the  events  provided  for  by  the 
Trades  Union  Act,  187 1,  section  nine,  except  in  respect  of  any 
tortious  act  committed  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  union  in  contempla- 
tion or  in  furtherance  of  a  trade  dispute. 


TRADE  UNIONISM  8/ 

J*.  Short  Title  and  Constmdion 

(i)  This  Act  may  be  cited  as  the  Trade  Disputes  Act,  1906,  and 
the  Trade  Union  Acts,  187 1  and  1876,  and  this  Act  may  be  cited 
together  as  the  Trade  Union  Acts,  187 1  to  igo6. 

(2)  In  this  Act  the  expression  "  trade  union "  has  the  same 
meaning  as  in  the  Trade  Union  Acts,  187 1  and  1876,  and  shall 
include  any  combination  as  therein  defined,  notwithstanding  that 
such  combination  may  be  the  branch  of  a  trade  union. 

(3)  In  this  Act  and  in  the  Conspiracy  and  Protection  of  Property 
Act,  1875,  ^^  expression  '"  trade  dispute"  means  any  dispute  be- 
tween employers  and  workmen,  or  between  workmen  and  workmen, 
which  is  connected  with  the  employment  or  non-employment,  or  the 
terms  of  the  employment,  or  with  the  conditions  of  labour,  of  any 
person,  and  the  expression  "workmen"  means  all  persons  employed 
in  trade  or  industry,  whether  or  not  in  the  employment  of  the  em- 
ployer with  whom  a  trade  dispute  arises ;  and,  in  section  three  of 
the  last-mentioned  Act,  the  words  "  between  employers  and  work- 
men "  shall  be  repealed. 

Extract  14 

TRADE  UNION  ACT,  1871 

{34  6r=j>j  Vict.,  ch.31,  in  part) 

2.   Trade  Union  not  Criminal 

The  purposes  of  any  trade  union  shall  not,  by  reason  merely 
that  they  are  in  restraint  of  trade,  be  deemed  to  be  unlawful  so  as 
to  render  any  member  of  such  trade  union  liable  to  criminal  prose- 
cution for  conspiracy  or  otherwise. 

J.   Trade  Union  not  Unla^vfid  for  Civil  Purposes 

The  purposes  of  any  trade  union  shall  not,  by  reason  merely 
that  they  are  in  restraint  of  trade,  be  unlawful  so  as  to  render  void 
or  voidable  any  agreement  or  trust. 


88  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

4.   Trade  Union  Contracts 

Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  enable  any  court  to  entertain  any  legal 
proceeding  instituted  with  the  object  of  directly  enforcing  or  re- 
covering damages  for  the  breach  of  any  of  the  following  agree- 
ments, namely, 

1.  Any  agreement  between  members  of  a  trade  union  as  such, 

concerning  the  conditions  on  which  any  members  for  the 
time  being  of  such  trade  union  shall  or  shall  not  sell  their 
goods,  transact  business,  employ,  or  be  employed  : 

2.  Any  agreement  for  the  payment  by  any  person  of  any  sub- 

scription or  penalty  to  a  trade  union : 

3.  Any  agreement  for  the  application  of  the  funds  of  a  trade 

union  — 

(a)  To  provide  benefits  to  members ;  or 

(b)  To  furnish  contributions  to  any  employer  or  work- 

man not  a  member  of  such  trade  union,  in  con- 
sideration of  such  employer  or  workman  acting  in 
conformity  with  the  rules  or  resolutions  of  such 
trade  union ;  or 

(c)  To  discharge  any  fine  imposed  upon  any  person  by 

sentence  of  a  court  of  justice  ;  or, 

4.  Any  agreement  made  between  one  trade  union  and  another ;  or, 

5.  Any  bond  to  secure  the  performance  of  any  of  the  above- 

mentioned  agreements. 
But  nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  deemed  to  constitute  any  of 
the  above-mentioned  agreements  unlawful.   .   .  . 

6.  Registry  of  Trade  Unions 

Any  seven  or  more  members  of  a  trade  union  may  by  subscrib- 
ing their  names  to  the  rules  of  the  union,  and  otherwise  complying 
with  the  provisions  of  this  Act  with  respect  to  registry,  register  such 
trade  union  under  this  Act,  provided  that  if  any  one  of  the  pur- 
poses of  such  trade  union  be  unlawful  such  registration  shall  be  void. 


TRADE  UNIONISM  89 

7.  Buildings  for  Trade  Utiions 

It  shall  be  lawful  for  any  trade  union  registered  under  this  Act 
to  purchase  or  take  upon  lease  in  the  names  of  the  trustees  for 
the  time  being  of  such  union  any  land  not  exceeding  one  acre, 
and  to  sell,  exchange,  mortgage,  or  let  the  same,  and  no  pur- 
chaser, assignee,  mortgagee,  or  tenant  shall  be  bound  to  inquire 
whether  the  trustees  have  authority  for  any  sale,  exchange,  mort- 
gage, or  letting,  and  the  receipt  of  the  trustees  shall  be  a  dis- 
charge for  the  money  arising  therefrom ;  and  for  the  purpose  of 
this  section  every  branch  of  a  trade  union  shall  be  considered 
a  distinct  union. 

8.  Propeiiy  of  Trade  Unions 

All  real  and  personal  estate  whatsoever  belonging  to  any  trade 
union  registered  under  this  Act  shall  be  vested  in  the  trustees  for 
the  time  being  of  the  trade  union  appointed  as  provided  by  this 
•Act,  for  the  use  and  benefit  of  such  trade  union  and  the  members 
thereof,  and  the  real  or  personal  estate  of  any  branch  of  a  trade 
union  shall  be  vested  in  the  trustees  of  such  branch,  and  be  under 
the  control  of  such  trustees,  their  respective  executors  or  adminis- 
trators, according  to  their  respective  claims  and  interests,  and  upon 
the  death  or  removal  of  any  such  trustees  the  same  shall  vest  in 
the  succeeding  trustees  for  the  same  estate  and  interest  as  the 
former  trustees  had  therein,  and  subject  to  the  same  trusts,  without 
any  conveyance  or  assignment  whatsoever,  save  and  except  in  the 
case  of  stocks  and  securities  in  the  public  funds  of  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland,  which  shall  be  transferred  into  the  names  of  such  new 
trustees  ;  and  in  all  actions,  or  suits,  or  indictments,  or  summary 
proceedings  before  any  court  of  summary  jurisdiction,  touching  or 
concerning  any  such  property,  the  same  shall  be  stated  to  be  the 
property  of  the  person  or  persons  for  the  time  being  holding  the 
said  office  of  trustee,  in  their  proper  names,  as  trustees  of  such 
trade  union,  without  any  further  description. 


90 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


g.  Actions  by  or  against  Trustees 

The  trustees  of  any  trade  union  registered  under  this  Act,  or  any 
other  officer  of  such  trade  union  who  may  be  authorised  so  to  do 
by  the  rules  thereof,  are  hereby  empowered  to  bring  or  defend,  or 
cause  to  be  brought  or  defended,  any  action,  suit,  prosecution,  or 
complaint  in  any  court  of  law  or  equity,  touching  or  concerning  the 
property,  right,  or  claim  to  property  of  the  trade  union ;  and  shall 
and  may,  in  all  cases  concerning  the  real  or  personal  property  of 
such  trade  union,  sue  and  be  sued,  plead  and  be  impleaded,  in  any 
court  of  law  or  equity,  in  their  proper  names,  without  other  descrip- 
tion than  the  title  of  their  office ;  and  no  such  action,  suit,  prose- 
cution or  complaint  shall  be  discontinued  or  shall  abate  by  the 
death  or  removal  from  office  of  such  persons  or  any  of  them,  but 
the  same  shall  and  may  be  proceeded  in  by  their  successor  or 
successors  as  if  such  death,  resignation,  or  removal  had  not  taken 
place ;  and  such  successors  shall  pay  or  receive  the  like  costs  as  if 
the  action,  suit,  prosecution,  or  complaint  had  been  commenced  in 
their  names  for  the  benefit  of  or  to  be  reimbursed  from  the  funds 
of  such  trade  union,  and  the  summons  to  be  issued  to  such  trustee 
or  other  officer  may  be  served  by  leaving  the  same  at  the  registered 
office  of  the  trade  union. 

10.  Litnitation  of  Responsibility 

A  trustee  of  any  trade  union  registered  under  this  Act  shall  not 

be  liable  to  make  good  any  deficiency  which  may  arise  or  happen 

in  the  funds  of  such  trade  union,  but  shall  be  liable  only  for  the 

moneys  which  shall  be  actually  received  by  him  on  account  of 

such  trade  union. 

II.    Treasurers 

Every  treasurer  or  other  officer  of  a  trade  union  registered  under 
this  Act,  at  such  times  as  by  the  rules  of  such  trade  union  he  should 
render  such  account  as  herein-after  mentioned,  or  upon  being  re- 
quired so  to  do,  shall  render  to  the  trustees  of  the  trade  union,  or 


TRADE  UNIONISM  9I 

to  the  members  of  such  trade  union,  at  a  meeting  of  the  trade 
union,  a  just  and  true  account  of  all  moneys  received  and  paid  by 
him  since  he  last  rendered  the  like  account,  and  of  the  balance 
then  remaining  in  his  hands,  and  of  all  bonds  or  securities  of  such 
trade  union,  which  account  the  said  trustees  shall  cause  to  be 
audited  by  some  fit  and  proper  person  or  persons  by  them  to  be 
appointed  ;  and  such  treasurer,  if  thereunto  required,  upon  the  said 
account  being  audited,  shall  forthwith  hand  over  to  the  said  trustees 
the  balance  which  on  such  audit  appears  to  be  due  from  him,  and 
shall  also,  if  required,  hand  over  to  such  trustees  all  securities  and 
effects,  books,  papers,  and  property  of  the  said  trade  union  in  his 
hands  or  custody ;  and  if  he  fail  to  do  so  the  trustees  of  the  said 
trade  union  may  sue  such  treasurer  in  any  competent  court  for  the 
balance  appearing  to  have  been  due  from  him  upon  the  account 
last  rendered  by  him,  and  for  all  the  moneys  since  received  by 
him  on  account  of  the  said  trade  union,  and  for  the  securities  and 
effects,  books,  papers,  and  property  in  his  hands  or  custody,  leaving 
him  to  set  off  in  such  action  the  sums,  if  any,  which  he  may  have 
since  paid  on  account  of  the  said  trade  union ;  and  in  such  action 
the  said  trustees  shall  be  entitled  to  recover  their  full  costs  of  suit, 
to  be  taxed  as  between  attorney  and  client. 

12.  Penalties 

If  any  officer,  member,  or  other  person  being  or  representing 
himself  to  be  a  member  of  a  trade  union  registered  under  this  Act, 
or  the  nominee,  executor,  administrator,  or  assignee  of  a  member 
thereof,  or  any  person  whatsoever,  by  false  representation  or  impo- 
sition obtain  possession  of  any  moneys,  securities,  books,  papers, 
or  other  effects  of  such  trade  union,  or,  having  the  same  in  his 
possession,  wilfully  withhold  or  fraudulently  misapply  the  same  or 
wilfully  apply  any  part  of  the  same  to  purposes  other  than  those 
expressed  or  directed  in  the  rules  of  such  trade  union,  or  any  part 
thereof,  the  court  of  summary  jurisdiction  for  the  place  in  which 


92  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  registered  office  of  the  trade  union  is  situate,  upon  a  complaint 
made  by  any  person  on  behalf  of  such  trade  union,  or  by  the  regis- 
trar, or  in  Scotland  at  the  instance  of  the  procurator  fiscal  of  the 
court  to  which  such  complaint  is  competently  made,  or  of  the  trade 
union,  with  his  concurrence,  may,  by  summary  order,  order  such 
officer,  member,  or  other  person  to  deliver  up  all  such  moneys, 
securities,  books,  papers,  or  other  effects  to  the  trade  union,  or  to 
repay  the  amount  of  money  applied  improperly,  and  to  pay,  if  the 
court  think  fit,  a  further  sum  of  money  not  exceeding  twenty 
pounds,  together  with  costs  not  exceeding  twenty  shillings ;  and, 
in  default  of  such  delivery  of  effects,  or  repayment  of  such  amount 
of  money,  or  payment  of  such  penalty  and  costs  aforesaid,  the  said 
court  may  order  the  said  person  so  convicted  to  be  imprisoned, 
with  or  without  hard  labour,  for  any  time  not  exceeding  three 
months  :  Provided,  that  nothing  herein  contained  shall  prevent  the 
said  trade  union,  or  in  Scotland  Her  Majesty's  Advocate,  from  pro- 
ceeding by  indictment  against  the  said  party ;  provided  also,  that 
no  person  shall  be  proceeded  against  by  indictment  if  a  conviction 
shall  have  been  previously  obtained  for  the  same  offence  under  the 
provisions  of  this  Act. 

13.  Registry  of  Trade  Union 

With  respect  to  the  registry,  under  this  Act,  of  a  trade  union, 
and  of  the  rules  thereof,  the  following  provisions  shall  have  effect : 

(i)  An  application  to  register  the  trade  union  and  printed  copies 
of  the  rules,  together  with  a  list  of  the  titles  and  names 
of  the  officers,  shall  be  sent  to  the  registrar  under  this 
Act: 

(2)  The  registrar  upon  being  satisfied  that  the  trade  union  has 

complied  with  the  regulations  respecting  registry  in  force, 
under  this  Act,  shall  register  such  trade  union  and  such 
rules : 

(3)  No  trade  union  shall  be  registered  under  a  name  identical 

with  that  by  which  any  other  existing  trade  union  has 


TRADE  UNIONISM  93 

been  registered,  or  so  nearly  resembling  such  name  as 
to  be  likely  to  deceive  the  members  or  the  public : 

(4)  Where  a  trade  union  applying  to  be  registered  has  been  in 

operation  for  more  than  a  year  before  the  date  of  such 
application,  there  shall  be  delivered  to  the  registrar  before 
the  registry  thereof  a  general  statement  of  the  receipts, 
funds,  effects,  and  expenditure  of  such  trade  union  in  the 
same  form,  and  showing  the  same  particulars  as  if  it  were 
the  annual  general  statement  required  as  herein-after  men- 
tioned to  be  transmitted  annually  to  the  registrar : 

(5)  The  registrar  upon  registering  such  trade  union  shall  issue 

a  certificate  of  registry,  which  certificate,  unless  proved 
to  have  been  withdrawn  or  cancelled,  shall  be  conclusive 
evidence  that  the  regulations  of  this  Act  with  respect  to 
registry  have  been  complied  with : 

(6)  One  of  Her  Majesty's  Principal  Secretaries  of  State  may 

from  time  to  time  make  regulations  respecting  registry 
under  this  Act,  and  respecting  the  seal  (if  any)  to  be  used 
for  the  purpose  of  such  registry,  and  the  forms  to  be  used 
for  such  registry,  and  the  inspection  of  documents  kept 
by  the  registrar  under  this  Act,  and  respecting  the  fees,  if 
any,  to  be  paid  on  registry,  not  exceeding  the  fees  speci- 
fied in  the  second  schedule  to  this  Act,  and  generally  for 
carrying  this  Act  into  effect. 

14.  Rules  of  Registered  Trade  Unions 

With  respect  to  the  rules  of  a  trade  union  registered  under  this 
Act,  the  following  provisions  shall  have  effect : 

(i)  The  rules  of  every  such  trade  union  shall  contain  provisions 

in  respect  of  the  several  matters  mentioned  in  the  first 

schedule  to  this  Act : 
(2)  A  copy  of  the  rules  shall  be  delivered  by  the  trade  union 

to  every  person  on  demand  on  payment  of  a  sum  not 

exceeding  one  shilling. 


94  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

75.  Registered  Office  of  Trade  Unions 
Every  trade  union  registered  under  this  Act  shall  have  a  regis- 
tered office  to  vi'hich  all  communications  and  notices  may  be 
addressed ;  if  any  trade  union  under  this  Act  is  in  operation  for 
seven  days  without  having  such  an  office,  such  trade  union  and 
every  officer  thereof  shall  each  incur  a  penalty  not  exceeding  five 
pounds  for  every  day  during  which  it  is  so  in  operation. 

Notice  of  the  situation  of  such  registered  office,  and  of  any 
change  therein,  shall  be  given  to  the  registrar  and  recorded  by 
him :  until  such  notice  is  given  the  trade  union  shall  not  be 
deemed  to  have  complied  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

16.  Annual  Returns 

A  general  statement  of  the  receipts,  funds,  effects,  and  expendi- 
ture of  every  trade  union  registered  under  this  Act  shall  be  trans- 
mitted to  the  registrar  before  the  first  day  of  June  in  every  year, 
and  shall  show  fully  the  assets  and  liabilities  at  the  date,  and  the 
receipts  and  expenditure  during  the  year  preceding  the  date  to 
which  it  is  made  out,  of  the  trade  union  ;  and  shall  show  separately 
the  expenditure  in  respect  of  the  several  objects  of  the  trade  union, 
and  shall  be  prepared  and  made  out  up  to  such  date,  in  such  form, 
and  shall  comprise  such  particulars,  as  the  registrar  may  from  time 
to  time  require;  and  every  member  of,  and  depositor  in,  any  such 
trade  union  shall  be  entitled  to  receive,  on  application  to  the 
treasurer  or  secretary  of  that  trade  union,  a  copy  of  such  general 
statement,  without  making  any  payment  for  the  same. 

Together  with  such  general  statement  there  shall  be  sent  to  the 
registrar  a  copy  of  all  alterations  of  rules  and  new  rules  and  changes 
of  officers  made  by  the  trade  union  during  the  year  preceding  the 
date  up  to  which  the  general  statement  is  made  out,  and  a  copy  of 
the  rules  of  the  trade  union  as  they  exist  at  that  date. 

Every  trade  union  which  fails  to  comply  with  or  acts  in  contra- 
vention of  this  section,  and  also  every  officer  of  the  trade  union, 
so  failing,  shall  each  be  liable  to  a  penalty  not  exceeding  five 
pounds  for  each  offence. 


TRADE  UNIONISM  95 

Every  person  who  wilfully  makes  or  orders  to  be  made  any  false 
entry  in  or  any  omission  from  any  such  general  statement,  or  in  or 
from  the  return  of  such  copies  of  rules  or  alterations  of  rules,  shall 
be  liable  to  a  penalty  not  exceeding  fifty  pounds  for  each  offence. 

ly.  Registrars 

The  registrars  of  the  friendly  societies  in  England,  Scotland,  and 
Ireland  shall  be  the  registrars  under  this  Act. 

The  registrars  shall  lay  before  Parliament  annual  reports  with 
respect  to  the  matters  transacted  by  such  registrars  in  pursuance 
of  this  Act. 

18.  Fraud  , 

If  any  person  with  intent  to  mislead  or  defraud  gives  to  any 
member  of  a  trade  union  registered  under  this  Act,  or  to  any  person 
intending  or  applying  to  become  a  member  of  such  trade  union,  a 
copy  of  any  rules  or  of  any  alterations  or  amendments  of  the  same 
other  than  those  respectively  which  exist  for  the  time  being,  on  the 
pretence  that  the  same  are  the  existing  rules  of  such  trade  union, 
or  that  there  are  no  other  rules  of  such  trade  union,  or  if  any 
person  with  the  intent  aforesaid  gives  a  copy  of  any  rules  to  any 
person  on  the  pretence  that  such  rules  are  the  rules  of  a  trade 
union  registered  under  this  Act  which  is  not  so  registered,  every 
person  so  offending  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor.  .  ,  . 

Extract  i^ 

TRADE  UNION  ACT,  1876 
( jp  6-=  40  Vict.,  ch.  22,  in  part) 

I.   Title 

This  Act  and  the  Trade  Union  Act,  187 1,  herein-after  termed 
the  principal  Act,  shall  be  construed  as  one  Act,  and  may  be  cited 
together  as  the  "Trade  Union  Acts,  187 1  and  1876,"  and  this 
Act  may  be  cited  separately  as  the  "  Trade  Union  Act  Amendment 
Act,  1876."  .  .  . 


g6  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

>  g.   Mejnbcrship  of  3 f mors 

A  person  under  the  age  of  twenty-one,  but  above  the  age  of  six- 
teen, may  be  a  member  of  a  trade  union,  unless  provision  be  made 
in  the  rules  thereof  to  the  contrary,  and  may,  subject  to  the  rules 
of  the  trade  union,  enjoy  all  the  rights  of  a  member  except  as 
herein  provided,  and  execute  all  instruments  and  give  all  acquit- 
tances necessary  to  be  executed  or  given  under  the  rules,  but  shall 
not  be  a  member  of  the  committee  of  management,  trustee,  or 
treasurer  of  the  trade  union. 

10.  Nomination 

A  member  of  a  trade  union  not  being  under  the  age  of  sixteen 
years  may,  by  writing  under  his  hand,  delivered  at,  or  sent  to,  the 
registered  office  of  the  trade  union,  nominate  any  person  not  be- 
ing an  officer  or  servant  of  the  trade  union  (unless  such  officer  or 
servant  is  the  husband,  wife,  father,  mother,  child,  brother,  sister, 
nephew,  or  niece  of  the  nominator),  to  whom  any  moneys  payable 
on  the  death  of  such  member  not  exceeding  fifty  pounds  shall  be 
paid  at  his  decease,  and  may  from  time  to  time  revoke  or  vary  such 
nomination  by  a  writing  under  his  hand  similarly  delivered  or  sent ; 
and  on  receiving  satisfactory  proof  of  the  death  of  a  nominator, 
the  trade  union  shall  pay  to  the  nominee  the  amount  due  to  the 
deceased  member  not  exceeding  the  sum  aforesaid. 

II.    Cha?ige  of  Name 

A  trade  union  may,  with  the  approval  in  writing  of  the  chief 
registrar  of  Friendly  Societies,  or  in  the  case  of  trade  unions  regis- 
tered and  doing  business  exclusively  in  Scotland  or  Ireland,  of  the 
assistant  registrar  for  Scotland  or  Ireland  respectively,  change  its 
name  by  the  consent  of  not  less  than  two  thirds  of  the  total 
number  of  members. 

No  change  of  name  shall  affect  any  right  or  obligation  of  the 
trade  union  or  of  any  member  thereof,  and  any  pending  legal 


TRADE  UNIONISM  97 

proceedings  may  be  continued  by  or  against  the  trustees  of  the 
trade  union  or  any  other  officer  who  may  sue  or  be  sued  on  behalf 
of  such  trade  union  notwithstanding  its  new  name. 

12.  Amalgatnafion 

Any  two  or  more  trade  unions  may,  by  the  consent  of  not  less 
than  two  thirds  of  the  members  of  each  or  every  such  trade  union, 
become  amalgamated  together  as  one  trade  union,  with  or  without 
any  dissolution  or  division  of  the  funds  of  such  trade  unions,  or 
either  or  any  of  them ;  but  no  amalgamation  shall  prejudice  any 
right  of  a  creditor  of  either  or  any  union  party  thereto.   .   .  . 

14.  Dissolution 

The  rules  of  every  trade  union  shall  provide  for  the  manner  of 
dissolving  the  same,  and  notice  of  every  dissolution  of  a  trade  union 
under  the  hand  of  the  secretary  and  seven  members  of  flie  same, 
shall  be  sent  within  fourteen  days  thereafter  to  the  central  office 
herein-before  mentioned,  or,  in  the  case  of  trade  unions  registered 
and  doing  business  exclusively  in  Scotland  or  Ireland,  to  the  assist- 
ant registrar  for  Scotland  or  Ireland  respectively,  and  shall  be 
registered  by  them :  Provided,  that  the  rules  of  any  trade  union 
registered  before  the  passing  of  this  Act  shall  not  be  invalidated 
by  the  absence  of  a  provision  for  dissolution.  .  .   . 

16.  Definition  of  ^'^ Trade  Union'''' 

The  term  "  trade'union  "  means  any  combination,  whether  tem- 
porary or  permanent,  for  regulating  the  relations  between  work- 
men and  masters,  or  between  workmen  and  workmen,  or  between 
masters  and  masters,  or  for  imposing  restrictive  conditions  on  the 
conduct  of  any  trade  or  business,  whether  such  combination  would 
or  would  not,  if  the  principal  Act  had  not  been  passed,  have  been 
deemed  to  have  been  an  unlawful  combination  by  reason  of  some 
one  or  more  of  its  purposes  being  in  restraint  of  trade. 


98  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  i6 

CONSPIRACY  AND  PROTECTION  OF  PROPERTY  ACT,  1875 
(jc?  &^  sg  Vict.,  ch.  86,  in  part) 

J.    Conspiracy,  and  Protection  of  Property 

An  agreement  or  combination  by  two  or  more  persons  to  do  or 
procure  to  be  done  any  act  in  contemplation  or  furtherance  of  a 
trade  dispute  between  employers  and  workmen  shall  not  be  indict- 
able as  a  conspiracy  if  such  act  committed  by  one  person  would 
not  be  punishable  as  a  crime. 

Nothing  in  this  section  shall  exempt  from  punishment  any  per- 
sons guilty  of  a  conspiracy  for  which  a  punishment  is  awarded  by 
any  Act  of  Parliament. 

Nothing  in  this  section  shall  affect  the  law  relating  to  riot,  un- 
lawful assembly,  breach  of  the  peace,  or  sedition,  or  any  offence 
against  the  State  or  the  Sovereign. 

A  crime  for  the  purposes  of  this  section  means  an  offence  pun- 
ishable on  indictment,  or  an  offence  which  is  punishable  on  sum- 
mary conviction,  and  for  the  commission  of  which  the  offender  is 
liable  under  the  statute  making  the  offence  punishable  to  be  im- 
prisoned either  absolutely  or  at  the  discretion  of  the  court  as  an 
alternative  for  some  other  punishment. 

Where  a  person  is  convicted  of  any  such  agreement  or  combi- 
nation as  aforesaid  to  do  or  procure  to  be  done  an  act  which  is 
punishable  only  on  summary  conviction,  and  is  sentenced  to  im- 
prisonment, the  imprisonment  shall  not  exceed  three  months,  or 
such  longer  time,  if  any,  as  may  have  been  prescribed  by  the 
statute  for  the  punishment  of  the  said  act  when  committed  by 
one  person. 


TRADE  UNIONISM  99 

4.  Breach  of  Contract  by  Persons  einployed  in  Supply  of  Gas 
or  Water 

Where  a  person  employed  by  a  municipal  authority  or  by  any 
company  or  contractor  upon  whom  is  imposed  by  Act  of  Parlia- 
ment the  duty,  or  who  have  otherwise  assumed  the  duty  of  supply- 
ing any  city,  borough,  town,  or  place,  or  any  part  thereof,  with 
gas  or  water,  wilfully  and  maliciously  breaks  a  contract  of  service 
with  that  authority  or  company  or  contractor,  knowing  or  having 
reasonable  cause  to  believe  that  the  probable  consequences  of 
his  so  doing,  either  alone  or  in  combination  with  others,  will  be 
to  deprive  the  inhabitants  of  that  city,  borough,  town,  place,  or 
part,  wholly  or  to  a  great  extent  of  their  supply  of  gas  or  water, 
he  shall  on  conviction  thereof  by  a  court  of  summary  jurisdic- 
tion, or  on  indictment  as  herein-after  mentioned,  be  liable  either 
to  pay  a  penalty  not  exceeding  twenty  pounds  or  to  be  impris- 
oned for  a  term  not  exceeding  three  months,  with  or  without 
hard  labour. 

Every  such  municipal  authority,  company,  or  contractor  as  is 
mentioned  in  this  section  shall  cause  to  be  posted  up,  at  the  gas- 
works or  waterworks,  as  the  case  may  be,  belonging  to  such  au- 
thority or  company  or  contractor,  a  printed  copy  of  this  section  in 
some  conspicuous  place  where  the  same  may  be  conveniently  read 
by  the  persons  employed,  and  as  often  as  such  copy  becomes  de- 
faced, obliterated,  or  destroyed,  shall  cause  it  to  be  renewed  with 
all  reasonable  despatch. 

If  any  municipal  authority  or  company  or  contractor  make  de- 
fault in  complying  with  the  provisions  of  this  section  in  relation  to 
such  notice  as  aforesaid,  they  or  he  shall  incur  on  summary  con- 
viction a  penalty  not  exceeding  five  pounds  for  every  day  during 
which  such  default  continues,  and  every  person  who  unlawfully  in- 
jures, defaces,  or  covers  up  any  notice  so  posted  up  as  aforesaid 
in  pursuance  of  this  Act,  shall  be  liable  on  summary  conviction  to 
a  penalty  not  exceeding  forty  shillings. 


lOO  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

J".  Breach  of  Contract  involving  Injury  to  Persons  or  Property 

Where  any  person  wilfully  and  maliciously  breaks  a  contract  of 
service  or  of  hiring,  knowing  or  having  reasonable  cause  to  believe 
that  the  probable  consequences  of  his  so  doing,  either  alone  or  in 
combination  with  others,  will  be  to  endanger  human  life,  or  cause 
serious  bodily  injury,  or  to  expose  valuable  property  whether  real 
or  personal  to  destruction  or  serious  injury,  he  shall  on  conviction 
thereof  by  a  court  of  summary  jurisdiction,  or  on  indictment  as 
herein-after  mentioned,  be  liable  either  to  pay  a  penalty  not  exceed- 
ing twenty  pounds,  or  to  be  imprisoned  for  a  term  not  exceeding 
three  months,  with  or  without  hard  labour. 

6.  Penalty  for  Neglect  by  Master 

Where  a  master,  being  legally  liable  to  provide  for  his  servant 
or  apprentice  necessary  food,  clothing,  medical  aid,  or  lodging,  wil- 
fully and  without  lawful  excuse  refuses  or  neglects  to  provide  the 
same,  whereby  the  health  of  the  servant  or  apprentice  is  or  is 
likely  to  be  seriously  or  permanently  injured,  he  shall  on  summary 
conviction  be  liable  either  to  pay  a  penalty  not  exceeding  twenty 
pounds,  or  to  be  imprisoned  for  a  term  not  exceeding  six  months, 
with  or  without  hard  labour. 

7.  Pe7ialty  for  Intimidation  or  Annoyance 

Every  person  who,  with  a  view  to  compel  any  other  person  to 
abstain  from  doing  or  to  do  any  act  which  such  other  person  has 
a  legal  right  to  do  or  abstain  from  doing,  wrongfully  and  without 
legal  authority  — 

1 .  Uses  violence  to  or  intimidates  such  other  person  or  his  wife 

or  children,  or  injures  his  property ;  or, 

2.  Persistently  follows  such  other  person  about  from  place  to 

place ;  or, 


TRADE  UNIONISM  lOI 

3.  Hides  any  tools,  clothes,  or  other  property  owned  or  used  by 

such  other  person,  or  deprives  him  of  or  hinders  him  in 
the  use  thereof  ;  or, 

4.  Watches  or  besets  the  house  or  other  place  where  such  other 

person  resides,  or  works,  or  carries  on  business,  or  happens 
to  be,  or  the  approach  to  such  house  or  place ;  or, 

5.  Follows  such  other  person  with  two  or  more  other  persons 

in  a  disorderly  manner  in  or  through  any  street  or  road, 
shall,  on  conviction  thereof  by  a  court  of  summary  jurisdiction, 
or  on  indictment  as  herein-after  mentioned,  be  liable  either  to 
pay  a  penalty  not  exceeding  twenty  pounds,  or  to  be  impris- 
oned for  a  term  not  exceeding  three  months,  with  or  without 
hard  labour. 

Attending  at  or  near  the  house  or  place  where  a  person  resides, 
or  works,  or  carries  on  business,  or  happens  to  be,  or  the  approach 
to  such  house  or  place,  in  order  merely  to  obtain  or  communicate 
information,  shall  not  be  deemed  a  watching  or  besetting  within 
the  meaning  of  this  section. 

8.  Rednctiofi  of  Penalties 

Where  in  any  Act  relating  to  employers  or  workmen  a  pecuniary 
penalty  is  imposed  in  respect  of  any  offence  under  such  Act,  and 
no  power  is  given  to  reduce  such  penalty,  the  justices  or  court 
having  jurisdiction  in  respect  of  such  offence  may,  if  they  think 
it  just  so  to  do,  impose  by  way  of  penalty  in  respect  of  such 
offence  any  sum  not  less  than  one  fourth  of  the  penalty  imposed 
by  such  Act.  .  .  . 

16.   Saving  Clause 

Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  apply  to  seamen  or  to  apprentices  to 
the  sea  service.  .  .  . 


I02  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


Extract  ly 

LABOUR  AND   THE   PAYMENT   OF   MEMBERS   OF 
PARLIAMENT 

{Mr.  Arthur  Lee  and  Mr.  Ramsay  Macdo)tald^  Commons., 
Angnst  lo,  191 1) 

Motion  moved  by  Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer, 

That,  in  the  opinion  of  this  House,  provision  should  be  made  for  the 
payment  of  a  salary  at  the  rate  of  four  hundred  pounds  a  year  to  every 
Member  of  this  House,  excluding  any  Member  who  is  for  the  time  being 
in  receipt  of  a  salary  as  an  officer  of  the  House,  or  as  a  Minister,  or  as  an 
officer  of  His  Majesty's  Household. 

Mr.  Lee  ^ :  .  .  .  I  claim,  and  that  is  my  argument,  that  the 
representatives  of  the  people  are  entirely  in  a  different  category 
from  servants  of  the  State ;  they  are  not  servants  even  of  their 
constituencies.  They  are  free  representatives  of  their  constitu- 
encies ;  at  any  rate,  they  have  been  in  the  past  and  I  hope  they 
will  so  remain.  It  is  further  not  essential  they  should  give  their 
whole  time  to  the  business  of  Parliament.  It  is  well  known  many 
of  the  most  useful  and  influential  Members  of  this  House  have 
not  given  their  whole  time.  If  a  change  of  this  kind  is  desired 
I  maintain  the  people  ought  to  be  consulted  with  regard  to  it,  be- 
cause at  least  it  is  they  who  have  to  pay.  I  feel  strongly  it  is  not 
fair,  at  any  rate  it  is  highly  undesirable,  to  hold  out  this  bait  to 
men  who  have  in  their  hands  the  power  to  confer  this  pecuniary 
benefit  upon  themselves.  It  is  a  temptation  which  may  warp  their 
judgment.  It  is  a  temptation,  not  to  poor  men  only,  but  even 
to  well-to-do  and  to  rich  men  as  well,  because,  whatever  a  man's 
income  may  be,  whether  it  is  ^100  or  ^10,000  a  year,  his  com- 
mitments and  responsibilities  are  probably  in  proportion.    And  I 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  29,  col.  1366  sqq. 


TRADE  UNIONISM  I03 

venture  to  say  there  is  no  man,  even  well-to-do  or  rich,  to  whom 
an  additional  ^400  would  not  be  a  real  convenience.  It  certainly 
would  be  in  my  case.  I  say  it  is  asking  too  much  of  human  nature 
to  bring  a  motion  of  this  kind  before  the  House  and  to  expect 
a  majority  of  Members  will  seriously  resist  the  proposal  when  it 
means  an  injury  to  their  financial  interests.  It  is  so  very  much 
easier  to  welcome  an  inflow  of  money  than  its  outflow.  Therefore 
I  recognise  this  proposal  is  bound  to  have  a  fatal  popularity  within 
the  walls  of  Parliament,  but  I  also  venture  to  think  it  will  be  justly 
and  greatly  unpopular  outside. 

Above  all,  I  object  to  it  because  I  believe  it  will  sound  the  death- 
knell  of  that  system  of  voluntary  service  which  has  been  the  chief 
and  unique  glory  of  British  public  life.  I  have  spoken  strongly  be- 
cause I  feel  more  strongly  on  this  particular  subject  than  on  almost 
any  other  in  the  whole  range  of  politics.  In  every  election  address 
I  have  issued,  and  in  the  numberless  speeches  I  have  made  to  my 
constituents,  I  have  expressed  my  repugnance  to  the  proposal  that 
Members  of  Parliament  should  be  paid  for  their  work  as  repre- 
sentatives of  the  constituencies,  and  the  objections  I  felt  to  it  when 
the  proposal  was  only  in  an  academic  form  have  been  deepened 
and  confirmed  by  the  effect  which  the  near  realisation  in  a  concrete 
form  of  this  proposal  has  already  had  upon  the  House  of  Commons. 
I  have,  in  the  eleven  years  I  have  been  in  this  House,  seen  many 
regrettable  incidents,  but  I  cannot  recall  any  more  repellent  or 
humiliating  spectacle  than  the  House  of  Commons,  the  very  day 
after  it  has  taken  into  its  own  hands  by  force  supreme  and  exclu- 
sive control  over  the  nation's  finances,^  hungrily  seizing  without 
even  a  decent  interval  upon  the  first  opportunity  after  the  Bill 
is  passed  to  help  themselves  out  of  the  pockets  of  the  taxpayers. 
The  Government  in  this  matter  appears  to  be  insatiable.  Not  con- 
tent in  this  week  with  dragging  the  Crown  through  the  mire  of 
party  politics,  not  content  with  destroying  the  legislative  authority 
of  the  other  House  of  Parliament,  they  are  now  proposing  to 

1  Cf.  infra,  ch.  ix. 


I04  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

destroy  the  moral  authority  of  the  House  of  Commons  as  well.  It 
is  because  I  love  the  House  of  Commons  and  am  proud  of  it  that 
I  wish  the  votes  of  my  hon.  Friends  on  this  side  to  save  it,  if 
possible,  from  this  wanton  and  unnecessary  humiliation.  .  .  . 

Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald  :  ...  It  is  a  profound  mistake  for 
the  hon.  Gentleman  to  assume  that  you  have  not  got  payment  of 
Members  now.  You  have  payment  of  Members  now ;  you  have 
payment  by  the  classes  to  whom  the  Members  belong.  I  wish  to 
refer  to  a  significant  expression  which  the  hon.  Gentleman  used. 
He  said : 

If  this  is  done,  it  cannot  be  undone.  The  reason  why  it  cannot  be  done 
is  this:  When  we  who  sit  on  this  side  of  the  House  come  into  office,  we 
will  not  be  able  to  move  that  this  Resolution  be  no  longer  operative,  be- 
cause they  will  tell  us  we  are  driving  our  opponents  out  of  the  House. 

But  if  the  undoing  of  this  Resolution  would  be  driving  their  oppo- 
nents out  of  the  House,  is  not  the  failure  to  pass  it  keeping  your 
opponents  out  of  the  House  ? 

Mr.  Lee  :  I  said  we  should  be  accused  of  driving  some  hon. 
Members  out  of  the  House.  I  say  that  I  think  this  principle  will 
bring  in  a  certain  new  style  of  Member. 

Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald  :  But  it  surely  cannot  bring  a  worse 
type  of  Member  than  my  hon.  Friends.  Let  me  say  quite  frankly 
that  I  doubt  if  there  are  two  Members  who  would  be  here  if  they 
were  not  paid  to  be  here,  and  therefore  my  remark  is  a  perfectly 
proper  one.  Consequently,  I  repeat  my  argument  that  the  persons 
who  are  going  to  come  in  are  not  going  to  be  persons  of  low  moral 
character,  they  are  not  going  to  be  undesirable  persons,  but  they 
are  going  to  be  the  type  of  men  who  cannot  get  in  here  now,  be- 
cause when  you  are  in  here  you  have  to  live  on  your  wits  by  being 
a  company  promoter,  a  lawyer,  a  half-pay  officer,  the  son  of  a  rich 
father,  or  that  rich  father  himself.  Consequently  the  people  who 
are  going  to  be  driven  out  are  not  people  who  are  undesirable,  but 
people  who  are  representative,  and  that  is  the  point.  LTntil  the 
door  is  sufficiently  opened  by  my  right  hon.  Friend's  Resolution, 


TRADE   UNIONISM  105 

these  people  cannot  come  here  unless  they  are  Members  of  the 
Irish  party,  or  Members  of  our  own  party.  There  is  one  point  that 
I  will  deal  with  in  a  second.  I  must  deal  with  it,  because  probably 
nobody  else  can  deal  with  it  in  the  same  way.  The  hon.  Member 
said  something  about  the  Osborne  Judgment.  There  was  no  attempt 
at  bargaining  over  that.  He  said  at  the  beginning  that  the  principle 
involved  in  the  payment  of  Members  must  be  justified  or  con- 
demned. That  ground  is  a  totally  different  one  from  that  upon 
which  the  Osborne  decision  has  got  to  be  justified  or  condemned. 
I  accept  every  word  my  hon.  Friend  said  in  that  respect.  The 
trade  unionists  were  driven  by  the  sheer  necessity  of  the  circum- 
stances to  lay  their  heads  and  their  funds  together  for  the  purpose 
of  paying  certain  out-of-pocket  expenses  for  the  men.  Theoret- 
ically, I  have  never  justified  that.  I  am  not  going  to  do  it  now. 
xA.U  I  say  is  that  if  this  House  neglected  to  do  its  duty,  then  things 
had  to  be  strained  in  order  that  the  representative  character  of  this 
House  should  be  maintained.  I  welcomed  certain  things  that  hap- 
pened which  compelled  this  House  to  face  its  own  responsibilities, 
to  turn  its  eyes  away  from  trade  unions  for  the  fulfilling  of  the 
responsibilities  which  this  House  ought  to  do  itself. 

We  have  said  all  along  that  we  desire  the  reversal  of  the  Osborne 
Judgment,  not  that  trade  unions  may  pay  Members,  but  that  they 
may  be  able  to  do  certain  other  things.  We  desire  the  payment 
of  Members,  because  we  maintain  that  this  House,  with  its  changed 
functions,  widened  field  of  operations,  increased  nearness  to  the 
lives  of  the  common  people  must  be  representative  of  the  common 
people,  and  that  their  representatives  ought  not  to  be  asked  to 
come  here  as  the  private  and  secret  pensioners  of  political  parties, 
having  their  election  expenses  paid  by  the  party  opposite,  or  the 
party  on  this  side,  and  when  they  are  sent  out  into  the  country  to 
take  part  at  bye-elections  receiving  fees  in  order  to  enable  them  to 
remain  here^ — ^kept  here  on  secret  party  funds,  the  subscribers 
to  which  cannot  be  published  in  the  light  of  open  day.  I  say  that 
is  the  sort  of  thing  that  is  going  to  degrade  workingmen.    That 


I06  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

is  the  sort  of  thing  that  is  going  to  degrade  not  only  the  working- 
man,  but  the  professional  man,  or  the  labourer.  The  man  who 
comes  in  under  these  circumstances,  belonging  to  either  party,  is 
the  man  who  is  going  to  degrade  public  life  and  lower  the  charac- 
ter of  the  House.  If  we  are  going  to  come  here,  we  are  going  to 
be  paid  by  the  State  for  services  done  for  the  State  in  the  open 
light  of  day,  our  constituencies  knowing  precisely  what  we  get, 
how  we  get  it,  and  examining  our  operations  here  in  justification 
of  the  way  we  get  it.  It  is  because  I  believe  that  will  raise  the 
dignity  of  the  House,  rather  than  lower  it,  it  is  because  I  believe 
that  when  we  are  paid  we  shall  feel  as  proud  as  we  do  now  of  be- 
ing Members  of  this  House,  sharing  in  its  discussions,  and  taking 
part  in  its  work,  that  I  will  give  my  heartiest  support  to  the  Reso- 
lution moved  by  my  right  hon.  Friend. 


CHAPTER   III 

CHILD  WELFARE 

[Mr.  Asquith,  addressing  the  Commons  on  April  i8,  1907,  said : 
"  There  is  nothing  that  calls  so  loudly  or  so  imperiously  as  the 
possibilities  of  social  reform.  .  .  .  First  of  all  there  is  the  child 
for  whom  heredity  and  parental  care  have  perhaps  done  nothing 
or  worse  than  nothing.  And  yet  it  is  the  raw  material,  upon  the 
fashioning  of  which  depends  whether  it  shall  add  to  the  common 
stock  of  wealth  and  intelligence  and  goodness,  or  whether  it  shall 
be  cast  aside  as  a  waste  product  in  the  social  rubbish  heap.  .  .   .  ^ 

When  Queen  Victoria  ascended  the  throne,  hardly  one  act 
of  Parliament  really  represented  the  protective  interest  which 
Mr.  Asquith  meant  that  the  State  should  take  in  the  welfare  of  the 
young,  and  members  of  Parliament  had  long  showed  themselves 
very  chary  about  interfering  with  what  many  honest  people  thought 
to  be  exclusive  rights  and  liberties  of  parents.  Aside  from  partial 
factory  and  mines  regulation,  there  was  little  State  action,  even  in 
education,  until  the  seventies.  In  the  year  18  69-1 8  70,  the  total 
cost  of  education  to  the  public  in  the  form  of  Parliamentary  grants 
—  for  of  course  there  was  then  no  rate-aid  —  was  ;!f72i,ooo.  But 
various  subsequent  educational  acts  widened  the  sphere  of  State 
control  until  by  1 906-1 907  the  amount  spent  on  education  from 
Parliamentary  grants  and  local  rates  reached  ^25,144,000. 

While  the  Unionists  were  still  in  office,  an  important  Inter- 
departmental Commission  on  Physical  Deterioration  was  appointed. 

1  Mr.  Asquith  was  urging  social  legislation  in  favour  of  the  aged  as  well  as  of  the 
child.    Cf.  infra,  p.  136. 

107 


I08  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

The  report  of  this  Commission/  published  on  July  28,  1904,  con- 
tained some  fifty-three  recommendations,  a  large  proportion  of 
which  were  concerned  with  child  life.  Children  in  all  schools  and 
factories  should  periodically  be  weighed  and  measured  ;  the  results, 
together  with  the  weekly  reports  of  medical  officers  to  Boards  of 
Guardians,  should  be  forwarded  to  a  new  advisory  council,  which 
would  thus  collect  valuable  data ;  overcrowding  should  be  dealt 
with  in  the  worst  districts  by  fixing  a  standard  (of  two  persons 
per  room  for  tenements  of  one,  two  or  three  rooms)  not  to  be  ex- 
ceeded after  a  certain  date ';  persons  displaced  might  be  transferred 
to  labour  colonies,  and  their  children  sent  to  public  nurseries  or 
boarded  out ;  factory  and  workshop  inspection  should  be  stricter 
and  include  medical  inspection ;  building  by-laws  and  the  provision 
of  open  spaces  should  receive  further  attention ;  special  attention 
should  be  paid  to  milk  supply,  and  standards  fixed  to  check  the 
adulteration  of  all  foods ;  provision  should  be  made  by  the  local 
authorities  for  dealing  with  underfed  children  —  possibly  by  the 
school  preparing  food  given  by  private  benevolence,  but  no  special 
system  was  specified  ;  hygiene  and  the  effects  of  alcoholism  should 
be  well  taught  in  schools,  and  cookery  continuation  classes  were 
urged ;  cleanliness  should  be  pressed  upon  the  children,  notably  as 
to  teeth,  eyes,  and  ears ;  in  country  districts  the  school  curriculum 
should  be  made  suitable  for  country  children,  who  should  not  go 
to  school  too  young ;  attention  should  be  paid  to  children's  games 
and  boys'  and  girls'  clubs,  and  juvenile  smoking  should  be  re- 
pressed. Generally  the  Report  contemplated  greatly  increased 
State  and  municipal  action  in  conjunction  with  private  benevolence, 
and  for  the  benefit  in  the  main  of  the  rising  generation. 

Towards  the  fulfilment  of  this  programme,  the  Liberal  Govern- 
ment from  their  victory  in  1906,  together  with  their  Labour  allies, 
worked  steadily,  and  in  carrying  out  most  of  the  important  measures 
the  Conservatives  cooperated.   On  February  22,  1906,  a  bill  was  in-^->. 
troduced  in  the  House  of  Commons  by  Mr.  W.  T.  Wilson,  a  Labou/    \J 

1  Annual  Register,  1904,  p.  195. 


d) 


@ 


CHILD  WELFARE  I09 

member,  'dealing  with  the  provision  of  meals  for  necessitous  chil- 
dren in  elementary  schools.  Mr.  Wilson  moved  second  reading  of 
the  bill  on  March  2  (^Extract  18).  It  was  opposed  by  Mr.  Harold 
Cox,  Liberal  member  for  Preston  ^  (^Extract  ig),  and  by  others,  as 
lessening  parental  responsibility  and  tending  to  lower  wages,  but 
Mr.  Augustine  pjirrell.  President  of  the  Board  of  Education,  in  a 
happy  speech  {Extract  20)  approved  of  the  measure  in  behalf  of 
the  Government.  The  bill  was  subsequently  passed  in  an  amended 
form  in  both  Houses  and  received  the  royal  assent  on  December  21. 
This  statute,  known  as  the  Education  (Provision  of  Meals)  Act, 
1Q06,  is  given  below  as  Extract  21. 

This  was  only  a  beginning  of  the  legislation  affecting  children. 
In  1907  the  Education  Act  contained  special  provisions  for  play 
centres  and  for  free  medical  inspection  of  children.  To  decrease 
the  alarming  infant  mortality  and  secure  proper  medical  care  for 
young  children.  Lord  Robert  Cecil,  a  distinguished  Conservative 
member  of  the  House  of  Commons,  introduced  a  bill  on  April  23 
{Extract  22) ,  which  was  eventually  enacted  as  the  Notification  of 
Births  Act.  In  the  same  year  the  Probation  of  Offenders  Act  dealt 
with  juvenile  offenders  along  reformatory  rather  than  punitive  lines. 

The  Children  Act,  which  Mr.  Herbert  Samuel,  Under-Secretary  (^^T) 
of  State  for  the  Home  Department,  introduced  on  February  10, 
1908,  and  which  passed  third  reading  in  the  Commons  on  October 
19  and  in  the  Lords  on  November  30,  and  received  the  royal  as- 
sent on  December  2 1 ,  dealt  with  practically  every  phase  of  infant 
and  child  life,  protection  of  infants  and  little  children,  treatment  of 
children  in  reformatories  and  industrial  schools,  the  question  of 
juvenile  crime,  children's  courts  and  probation  officers.  A  slight 
idea  of  the  nature  and  scope  of  this  Act  may  be  gathered  from 
Mr.  Samuel's  remarks  on  First  Reading  (Extract  2j) . 

The  health  and  general  welfare  of  children,  as  well  as  of  adults, 
were  in  the  minds  of  the  framers  and  advocates  of  the  Housing 
and  Town  Planning  Act  of  1909.^] 

1  Mr.  Cox  frequently  voted  with  the  Unionist  minority.  2  cf.  infra,  ch.  vii. 


no  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  i8 

PROVISION  OF  MEALS  FOR  SCHOOL  CHILDREN 

{Air.  W.  T.  ]Vilso7i,  Commons,  March  2,  igo6) 

Mr.  Wilson  -^  said  he  did  not  think  anyone  in  the  House  would 
doubt  that  a  very  large  number  of  children  went  to  school  without 
food,  or  underfed,  and  the  object  of  the  Bill  was  to  provide  that 
meals  should  be  given  to  such  children.  Of  course,  differences  of 
opinion  might  arise  in  the  House  as  to  who  should  be  responsible 
for  the  feeding  of  the  children.  Some  hon.  Members  might  say 
that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  parents  to  see  that  their  children  were 
fed,  but  when  they  considered  the  amount  of  w^ages  that  some  par- 
ents earned,  they  must  be  satisfied  that  it  was  an  absolute  impossi- 
bility for  them  properly  to  feed  and  clothe  their  families.  There 
were  hundreds  of  thousands  of  families  in  this  country  whose 
weekly  income  did  not  exceed  i8s.,  and  he  thought  the  House 
would  agree  that  if  the  children  in  these  families  averaged  more 
than  three,  it  was  almost  impossible  for  them  to  be  fed  as  they 
ought  to  be.  Taking  i8s.  as  the  average  rate  of  wages  of  a  very 
large  number  of  unskilled  workers  in  this  country  —  and  he  was 
sorry  to  say  that  during  the  last  three  years  many  skilled  workers 
had  not  earned  more  than  i8s.  a  week- — ^and  taking  the  average 
family  as  consisting  of  three  children,  taking  the  rent  at  4s.  6d.  a 
week,  and  allowing  three  meals  per  head  per  day  at  i^d.  per  head 
per  meal,  it  would  be  seen  that  the  whole  of  the  wages  were  gone, 
and  nothing  was  left  for  clothing,  fire,  and  the  hundred  and  one 
things  required  in  a  household.  Therefore,  children  whose  parents 
were  in  that  position  should  at  least  be  fed.  It  was  not  the  fault 
of  the  children  that  they  were  there,  and  if  the  parents  through 
force  of  circumstances  were  unable  to  feed  them  properly,  the  State 
should  see  that  they  were  fed. 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  152,  col.  1390  sqq. 


CHILD  WELFARE  III 

The  State  recognised  that  it  was  to  its  best  interests  that  the 
children  should  be  educated,  and  it  was  only  right  that  the  children 
should  be  in  a  fit  condition  to  receive  instruction.  Better  results 
would  then  accrue  from  education.  The  education  authority  was 
the  proper  authority  to  deal  with  the  question.  He  went  further 
and  said  that  even  in  cases  where  the  parents  of  children  were 
earning  sufficient  to  provide  them  with  food,  if  the  education  au- 
thority thought  it  would  be  to  the  best  interests  of  the  State  that 
those  children  should  be  fed,  they  should  have  the  power  to  feed 
them  and  to  make  a  charge  upon  the  parents  afterwards.  In  many 
of  the  industrial  centres  both  fathers  and  mothers  were  working 
during  the  day,  and  if  the  children  had  the  opportunity  of  having 
meals  supplied  by  the  authority,  they  would  be  quite  willing  to  pay 
for  such  meals.  Even  if  the  parents  were  unable  to  pay,  they  should 
not  be  pauperised  by  accepting  such  assistance.  He  asked  the 
House  to  look  at  the  matter  from  a  strictly  business  standpoint. 
Everyone  must  have  noticed  the  very  large  number  of  what  he 
might  term  human  weeds  among  the  children  who  attended  the 
schools  of  the  State.  The  present  system  which  permitted  children 
to  attend  school  in  an  underfed  condition  was  the  means  of,  he  was 
almost  going  to  say,  manufacturing  undesirables  ;  but  undoubtedly 
it  was  to  a  great  extent  responsible  for  physical  deterioration.  If 
that  deterioration  could  be  arrested  by  providing  children  with  food, 
they  would  have  done  something  which  would  be  beneficial  to  the 
nation  in  the  future.  No  one  would  deny  that  if  a  child  went  to 
school  with  a  full  stomach,  it  was  in  a  better  condition  to  receive 
instruction,  and  would  be  more  fitted  to  take  its  place  in  life. 

The  fact  that  children  attended  school  underfed  was  also  respon- 
sible for  mental  deterioration.  He  was  convinced  that  the  presence 
of  a  large  number  of  inmates  of  lunatic  asylums  and  epileptic 
homes  could  be  traced  to  the  fact  that  in  their  early  days  they  were 
underfed.  No  one  would  deny,  too,  that  underfeeding  had  a  tend- 
ency to  create  disease.  He  was  sure  that  their  being  underfed  was 
a  direct  incentive  to  crime  on  the  part  of  children. 


112  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

In  the  opinion  of  some  who  were  opposed  to  the  State  feeding 
of  children  reliance  ought  to  be  placed  upon  charity.  They  had  re- 
lied upon  charity  too  long  as  it  was.  .  .  .  Charity  was  not  a  reliable 
source  from  which  to  provide  meals  for  children,  and  therefore  he 
asked  the  Government  to  accept  the  Bill  to  provide  underfed  school 
children  with  aj  least  one  good  meal  a  day.  If  this  was  done  he 
felt  sure  the  nation  would  appreciate  it.  From  a  business  point  of 
view  the  money  would  be  well  invested,  because  not  only  would  the 
children  be  better  equipped  for  fighting  the  battle  of  life,  but  it 
would  be  found  in  the  near  future  that  the  expenditure  on  prisons, 
workhouses,  and  asylums  was  considerably  reduced,  and  therefore 
the  money  invested  would  be  returned  with  interest.  He  moved 
the  Second  Reading  of  the  Bill,  because  he  believed  it  would  be  to 
the  best  interests  and  the  welfare  of  the  nation,  and  he  asked  the 
House  in  the  name  of  humanity  and  Christianity  to  adopt  the  Bill. 


Extract  ig 

OPPOSITION  TO   PROVISION  OF  MEALS 

(J/r.  Harold  Cox;  Conitiions^  March  2,  igo6) 

Mr.  Cox  ^  said  he  should  like  to  move  the  following  Amendment 
to  the  Provision  of  Meals  Bill : 

That  it  is  undesirable  to  proceed  further  with  a  measure  which  would 
diminish  the  responsibility  of  the  parents  for  the  maintenance  of  their 
children,  and  would  tend  to  lower  the  wages  of  the  poorer  classes. 

His  reason  for  objecting  to  this  Bill  was  that  it  dealt  only  with  a 
symptom  instead  of  with  the  disease  itself.  People  saw  that  a  cer- 
tain number  of  children  going  to  school  were  badly  fed.  They  were 
horrified  at  the  fact,  and  they  proceeded  at  once  to  expostulate, 
but  the  remedy  they  suggested  was  merely  to  feed  these  particular 
children.    But,  surely,  when  a  child  was  sent  to  a  school  improperly 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  152,  col.  1413  sqq. 


CHILD  WELFARE  II3 

fed  it  meant  that  there  must  be  something  wrong  in  the  home  of 
the  child.  Obviously,  then,  the  first  thing  to  do  was  to  ascertain 
what  was  wrong  with  the  homes  —  in  other  words,  before  they 
dealt  with  the  problem  of  the  school  children  they  must  make  in- 
quiry at  the  homes  as  to  what  was  the  cause  of  the  underfeeding 
of  the  children. 

This  Bill  provided  no  machinery  for  such  an  inquiry.  Yet  ex- 
perience proved  conclusively  that  where  inquiry  did  take  place,  then 
those  symptoms  which  appeared  to  be  so  serious  at  first  sight  turned 
out  to  be  comparatively  unimportant  in  relation  to  other  and  graver 
diseases.  He  would  take  the  case  of  Johanna  Street  School.  The 
hon.  Member  for  North  Camberwell  and  other  investigators  about 
twelve  months  ago  visited  that  school,  and  complained  that  a  num- 
ber of  children  were  underfed.  That  complaint  was  dealt  with  by 
the  Board  of  Guardians,  who  instructed  their  superintending  reliev- 
ing officer  to  inquire  into  the  actual  homes  of  the  children  and  as- 
certain the  causes  of  the  underfeeding.  What  did  he  find  ?  In  the 
first  place,  the  parents  in  all  the  houses  whence  underfed  children 
came  were  instructed  to  apply  to  the  relieving  officer  if  they  wanted 
food.  Only  in  one  case  was  any  application  made.  That  alone 
seemed  to  dispose  of  the  fact  that  it  was  impossible  for  the  parents 
to  feed  their  children.  That  was  not  all.  They  found  in  many  cases 
that  the  incomes  of  the  families  ranged  from  20s.  up  to  as  much 
as  72  s.  a  week. 

An  Hon.  Member  :  These  facts  were  subsequently  challenged. 

Mr.  Cox  said  at  any  rate  they  had  them  on  the  authority  of  the 
Lambeth  Board  of  Guardians.  But  what  was  more  important  still 
was  that  in  many  houses  where  parents  were  asked  why  children 
were  sent  to  school  without  a  proper  meal,  the  answer  was  some- 
thing to  this  effect,  "  Oh,  we  heard  that  other  children  were  getting 
meals  for  nothing  and  we  thought  ours  might  do  the  same." 

They  would  have  to  begin  not  with  the  child,  but  with  the 
family.  They  had  to  ask  what  was  wrong  in  the  family.  Two 
things  might  be  wrong  in  the  family.     Either  the  family  might 


114  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

be  honest  but  poor  through  adverse  circumstances,  or  it  might 
be  drunken  and  dishonest.  In  the  first  event  it  was  their  duty 
to  relieve  the  family  as  a  whole,  and  not  to  pick  out  one  child. 
In  the  second  event,  it  rnight,  in  extreme  cases  of  drunkenness 
or  other  serious  vice,  be  necessary  to  remove  the  children  from 
the  family  altogether.  In  the  majority  of  cases,  however,  it  would 
be  sufficient  to  screw  up  the  parents  to  a  realisation  of  the  duty 
that  they  owed  to  their  children.  The  simplest  way  of  accom- 
plishing that  object,  and  certainly  the  least  expensive,  would  be 
to  placard  the  doors  of  the  houses  of  parents  who  wilfully  sent 
their  children  to  school  underfed  with  the  simple  announcement, 
"  These  people  send  their  children  to  school  without  feeding  them." 

An  Hon.  Member  :  What  a  statesmanlike  suggestion  that  is  ! 

Mr.  Cox  said  he  could  quite  understand  hon.  Gentlemen  on  the 
other  side  objecting  to  his  proposal,  for  he  gathered  from  some 
of  their  speeches  this  afternoon  that  their  object  was  to  relieve 
parents  of  all  their  responsibilities. 

.  .  .  The  effect  of  this  Bill  would  be  to  create  a  body  of 
workingmen  who,  instead  of  helping  their  fellows  and  standing 
alone,  would  be  sponging  upon  their  fellow  workers.  What  would 
be  the  effect  on  the  child  ?  [An  Hon.  Member  :  It  would  be 
better  fed.]  If  they  took  the  child  away  from  the  home,  they 
would  in  the  first  place  lower  the  standard  of  the  home.  ["  No, 
no."]  That  might  seem  a  striking  statement  to  make,  but  it  was 
borne  out  by  the  experience  of  people  who  spent  their  lives  in 
working  among  the  poorer  classes.  The  duty  of  providing  for  a 
child  was  one  of  the  greatest  bonds  in  keeping  up  the  standard  of 
a  home.  A  woman  was  ashamed  to  be  drunk  in  the  presence  of 
her  child.  Take  away  the  child  and  that  motive  for  self-restraint 
was  gone.  He  had  been  told  of  the  case  of  a  poor  woman  with 
an  illegitimate  child,  who  was  working  honourably  to  maintain  it. 
Some  charitable  people  thought  it  was  very  hard  upon  her  to  have 
to  keep  a  child  out  of  her  scanty  wages,  and  so  they  relieved  her 
of  her  burden  and  took  the  child  away.    What  was  the  result  ? 


CHILD  WELFARE  II5 

That  poor  woman,  with  no  longer  any  stimulus  to  exertion  or 
motive  for  maintaining  a  higher  standard,  dropped  gradually  down 
to  the  lowest  depths  of  degradation. 

Mr.  J.  Ward  on  a  point  of  order  said  there  was  no  suggestion 
of  taking  the  children  away  from  the  parents. 

Mr.  Speaker  :  I  think  the  hon.  Member's  observations  were  in 
order.    I  see  no  reason  to  interfere. 

Mr.  Cox  said  he  was  sorry  he  was  not  making  his  argument 
clear  to  his  hon.  Friend,  but  he  was  pointing  out  that  if  they  were 
to  give  meals,  they  must  also  give  boots  and  clothing.  Then  they 
must  begin  to  ask  under  what  conditions  the  child  lived,  and  what 
kind  of  rooms  it  slept  in,  was  it  washed  before  it  was  put  to  bed, 
and  did  it  sleep  in  a  decent  cot  at  night.  ["  Hear,  hear,"  from  the 
Labour  Benches,  and  cries  of  "  Why  not  ?  "] 

Mr.  Crooks  :  We  should  do  it ;  we  should  not  ask. 

Mr.  Cox  :  Then  the  hon.  Member's  colleague  had  been  a  little 
slow  in  taking  his  point.  When  they  had  asked  themselves  these 
questions  they  were  driven  to  say,  "  We  must  take  this  child 
away.  We  must  house  it  somewhere  else,  where  it  can  get  better 
air,  etc."  They  would  house  it  in  a  beautiful  building,  with  sani- 
tary walls,  and  provide  neat  little  beds  arranged  in  rows  all  exactly 
alike.  They, would  feed  it  well  at  long  tables  with  others  and 
clothe  it  well,  but  there  would  be  no  holidays  for  that  child.  It 
would  always  live  in  this  great  barrack.  ["  Why  ? "]  If  the  home 
was  unfit  for  it  in  school-time,  it  was  unfit  for  it  in  holiday  time, 
and  it  would  be  a  crime  to  send  it  back  to  the  home  from  which 
they  had  rescued  it.  It  would  always  live  in  this  barrack  with 
never  a  holiday  and  never  a  sight  of  the  ordinary  human  relation- 
ships that  mankind  enjoyed. 

An  Hon.  Member  :  Is  that  in  the  Bill  ? 

Mr.  Cox  :  It  is  a  consequence  of  the  Bill.  They  had  got,  he 
said,  to  think  in  all  these  social  problems  of  where  they  were 
drifting.  His  hon.  P>iend  the  Member  for  Merthyr  Tydfil  [Mr. 
Keir  Hardie]  was  far-sighted  enough  to  see  where  he  was  going, 


Il6  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

but  there  were  a  great  many  Members  on  both  sides  of  the 
House  who  did  not  see  where  they  were  going  ["  Oh,  oh  "],  and 
where  this  Bill  would  lead  to.  When  they  had  got  these  children 
fed  and  clothed,  did  they  imagine  they  had  made  the  children 
happy  ?  Was  there  not  something  else  which  every  child  wanted 
—  something  that  could  not  be  provided  by  any  Act  of  Parlia- 
ment ?  Was  there  not  love  of  home  and  parents  ?  It  was  that 
love  they  were  going  to  destroy,  and  when  they  had  destroyed  it, 
they  would  put  nothing  in  its  place.  They  could  not.  Did  they 
think  they  would  have  solved  the  problem  of  poverty  ?  They 
would  have  only  made  more  people  willing  to  accept  dependence 
upon  others.  It  was  not  by  such  methods  as  these  that  they 
would  raise  the  mass  of  the  people  to  a  better  condition.  In  the 
long  run  they  could  only  raise  people  by  teaching  them  to  raise 
themselves,  but  the  effect  of  this  Bill  would  be  to  encourage  people 
to  degrade  themselves. 


Extract  20 

GOVERNMENT   ADVOCACY   OF   PROVISION   OF   MEALS 

{Mr.  Augustine  Bin-e/I,  President  of  the  Boaiul  of  I^dncation^ 
Com/nofis^  March  2,  igo6) 

Mr.  Birrell  ^  said  they  had  had  an  interesting  and  profitable 
discussion,  and  many  speeches  had  been  made  by  new  Members, 
who  had  shown  an  almost  alarming  capacity  for  taking  an  active 
part  in  the  debates.  It  was  a  subject  which  touched  all  of  them, 
this  of  hungry  children  in  schools.  Most  Members  of  the  House, 
he  suspected,  were  fathers,  all  of  them  had  been  children,  and 
some  of  them  had  been  teachers,  and  in  all  these  capacities  they 
knew  that  to  attempt  to  teach  a  hungry  child,  faint  and  weak, 
the  elements  of  learning,  either  divine  or  human,  was  an  act  of 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  152,  col.  1440  sqq. 


CHILD  WELFARE  11/ 

cruelty.  They  also  knew  that  to  attempt  anything  of  the  kind  at 
the  expense  of  either  the  taxpayer  or  the  ratepayer  was  a  waste 
of  public  money. 

This  was,  therefore,  in  the  first  place  an  educational  question. 
Me  protested  in  the  name  of  the  teachers  against  so  odious  a 
duty  being  imposed  upon  them  as  the  attempt  to  teach  hungry 
children.  He  knew  quite  well  how  generously  teachers  had  ap- 
proached the  task,  how  kindly  they  had  attempted  to  discharge 
it,  and  what  a  heavy  tax  it  too  often  was  upon  their  slender 
resources  to  try  and  mitigate  the  evils  and  the  hardships  that 
came  under  their  attention.  There  was  the  hungry  child  ;  they 
must  either  feed  it  or  turn  it  away ;  and  as  the  Minister  for  Edu- 
cation he  could  not  be  responsible  for  the  latter  alternative.  As 
everybody  was  agreed  that  the  child  could  not  be  taught  before 
it  was  fed,  then  fed  it  had  to  be. 

The  next  question  was.  By  what  agency  was  the  feeding  to  be 
done  ?  It  appeared  to  him  that  the  proper  agency,  in  the  first 
instance,  to  see  that  this  primary  step  was  taken  was  the  edu- 
cation authority  itself.  As  to  whether  or  not  local  education 
authorities  should  have  the  power,  if  so  disposed,  to  try  the 
experiment  of  providing  food  for  a  considerable  nurfiber  of  the 
children  who  might  avail  themselves  of  it,  endeavouring  to  be 
repaid  the  cost  of  the  meals,  he  reminded  the  House  that  that 
course  had  been  adopted  for  many  years  in  Paris,  in  connection 
with  the  cafiti/ics  scolaires,  and  had  worked  exceedingly  well. 

There  was  one  advantage  of  teaching  poor  children  what  a 
good  dinner  was,  that  it  raised  their  own  standard  very  much, 
and  created  in  their  youthful  stomachs  a  divine  dissatisfaction 
with  their  lot.  He  could  conceive  no  greater  service  to  posterity 
than  to  raise  the  standard  of  living  in  the  children  of  the  present 
day.  Therefore  he  should  be  sorry  to  forbid  by  law  a  local 
authority  trying  the  experiment  of  feeding  children  upon  a  larger 
scale  than  would  be  necessary  if  it  were  to  be  confined  to  neces- 
sitous children.    In  Paris  10,500,000  meals  were  given  in  1904; 


Il8  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  those  it  was  difficult  to  ascertain  what  proportion  were  given 
gratuitously,  but  it  was  certain  that  a  very  large  proportion  were 
given  in  exchange  for  payment.  He  thought  that  what  Paris 
could  do  London  ought  to  be  able  to  do,  especially  after  the 
visit  of  the  County  Councillors  to  the  French  capital.  There  it 
was  found  possible  to  combine  a  good  system  of  feeding  the 
children,  which  should  be  gratuitous  to  those  whose  parents  stood 
in  need  of  it  without  in  any  way  interfering  with  payment  by 
those  who  could  afford  to  pay.  That  was  the  only  reason  why 
he  should  be  rather  sorry  were  the  local  authority  to  be  prohibited 
from  attempting  to  do  something  of  the  same  sort  as  was  done 
in  Paris. 

That  being  so,  the  question  became  one  rather  of  detail.  What 
means  were  to  be  employed  to  see  that  they  were  not  imposed 
upon }  Of  course,  parental  responsibility  was  a  great  ideal,  but 
how  it  could  really  be  destroyed  either  by  free  meals  being  given 
to  very  poor  children  or  by  meals  being  given  to  children  for  which 
they  paid,  he  was  at  a  loss  to  conceive.  He  was  not  one  of  those 
who  loved  the  phrase  "  the  children  of  the  State."  It  was  a 
phrase  which  grated  upon  his  ear.  The  State  could  not  have  any 
children.  The  mace  on  the  table  might  as  well  beguile  its  ample 
leisure  by  the  hope  of  a  child.  Man  was  born  of  a  woman,  and 
not  of  the  Local  Government  Board,  and  anything  which  in  any 
way  interfered  with  the  family  as  the  unit  of  our  civilisation  was 
greatly  to  be  deplored. 

On  what  rate  was  the  burden  to  fall  ?  Was  it  more  convenient 
it  should  fall  on  the  education  rate  or  on  the  poor  rate  ?  Whether 
the  education  rate  or  the  Poor  Law  rate  was  the  better  fund  to 
bear  the  burden  when  they  failed  to  recover  the  cost  was  a 
question  which  might  fairly  be  considered  by  the  Committee  to 
which  he  hoped  the  Bill  would  be  referred.  He  hoped  the  Com- 
mittee would  take  into  consideration  the  whole  question  as  to  how 
local  authorities  might  work  the  powers  conferred  by  this  Bill. 
Charity  was  not  to  be  sneezed  at,  but  it  required  to  be  steady 


CHILD  WELFARE  II9 

and  well-organised,  otherwise  it  was  apt  to  be  sporadic,  fanciful, 
and  fitful.  He  hoped,  too,  that  local  education  authorities  would 
fully  consider  whether  they  could  not  properly  utilise  voluntary 
agencies  and  organise  and  receive  contributions  from  them  in 
aid  of  the  rate  or  any  other  relief  they  might  think  necessary  to 
establish.  He  did  not  suppose  for  a  moment  that  any  popularly- 
elected  body,  with  ratepayers  behind  it,  would  be  anxious  to  in- 
crease the  burden  of  the  rates,  or  that  they  would  desire  to 
discourage  the  assistance  of  charitable  persons  in  the  community. 
He  thought  it  was  not  much  use  saying  that  this  question  was 
part  of  a  far  greater  question  —  everything  was  part  of  a  greater 
question.  Everything  was  part  and  parcel  of  education.  From 
the  teacher's  point  of  view,  boots  were  not  so  important  as  that 
the  child  should  be  fed.  This  was  a  practical  problem  which  pre- 
sented itself  every  day  in  almost  every  school  in  the  great  towns, 
and  we  had  to  deal  with  the  problem.  He  was  quite  content  to 
leave  posterity  to  deal  with  a  great  many  other  problems  which 
might  arise. 


Exti^act  21 

EDUCATION  (PROVISION  OF  MEALS)  ACT,  1906 

{6  Edw.  7,  ch.^'j) 

An  Act  to  make  provision  for    Meals    for    Children    attending 
Public  Elementary  Schools  in  England  and  Wales. 

(21st  December  1906) 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 


120  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

I.  Special  Power  of  Local  Education  Authority 

A  local  education  authority  under  Part  III  of  the  Education 
Act,  1902,  may  take  such  steps  as  they  think  fit  for  the  provision 
of  meals  for  children  in  attendance  at  any  public  elementary  school 
in  their  area,  and  for  that  purpose  — 

{a)  may  associate  with  themselves  any  committee  on  which  the 
authority  are  represented,  who  will  undertake  to  provide 
food  for  those  children  (in  this  Act  called  a  "  school  can- 
teen committee  ")  ;  and 
{h)  may  aid  that  committee  by  furnishing  such  land,  buildings, 
furniture,  and  apparatus,  and  such  officers  and  servants 
as  may  be  necessary  for  the  organisation,  preparation, 
and  service  of  such  meals ; 
but,  save  as  herein-after  provided,  the  authority  shall  not  incur 
any  expense  in  respect  of  the  purchase  of  food  to  be  supplied 
at  such  meals. 

2.  Recovery  of  the  Cost  of  Meals 

(i)  There  shall  be  charged  to  the  parent  of  ever)^  child  in 
respect  of  every  meal  furnished  to  that  child  under  this  Act  such 
an  amount  as  may  be  determined  by  the  local  education  authority, 
and,  in  the  event  of  payment  not  being  made  by  the  parent,  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  authority,  unless  they  are  satisfied  that  the 
parent  is  unable  by  reason  of  circumstances  other  than  his  own 
default  to  pay  the  amount,  to  require  the  payment  of  that  amount 
from  that  parent,  and  any  such  amount  may  be  recovered  summa- 
rily as  a  civil  debt. 

(2)  The  local  education  authority  shall  pay  over  to  the  school 
canteen  committee  so  much  of  any  money  paid  to  them  by,  or  re- 
covered from,  any  parent  as  may  be  determined  by  the  authority 
to  represent  the  cost  of  the  food  furnished  by  the  committee  to 
the  child  of  that  parent,  less  a  reasonable  deduction  in  respect  of 
the  expenses  of  recovering  the  same. 


CHILD  WELFARE  121 

J.  Potaer  of  Local  Education  Authority  to  defray  the  Cost 

Where  the  local  education  authority  resolve  that  any  of  the  chil- 
dren attending  an  elementary  school  within  their  area  are  unable 
by  reason  of  lack  of  food  to  take  full  advantage  of  the  education 
provided  for  them,  and  have  ascertained  that  funds  other  than 
public  funds  are  not  available  or  are  insufficient  in  amount  to  de- 
fray the  cost  of  food  furnished  in  meals  under  this  Act,  they  may 
apply  to  the  Board  of  Education,  and  that  Board  may  authorise 
them  to  spend  out  of  the  rates  such  sum  as  will  meet  the  cost  of 
the  provision  of  such  food,  provided  that  the  total  amount  expended 
by  a  local  education  authority  for  the  purposes  of  this  section  in 
any  local  financial  year  shall  not  exceed  the  amount  which  would 
be  produced  by  .a  rate  of  one  halfpenny  in  the  pound  over  the  area 
of  the  authority,  or,  where  the  authority  is  a  county  council  (other 
than  the  London  County  Council),  over  the  area  of  the  parish  or 
parishes  which  in  the  opinion  of  the  council  are  served  by  the 
school. 

4.  Provisions  as  to  Disfranchisement 

The  provision  of  any  meal  under  this  Act  to  a  child  and  the  fail- 
ure on  the  part  of  the  parent  to  pay  any  amount  demanded  under 
this  Act  in  respect  of  a  meal  shall  not  deprive  the  parent  of  any 
franchise,  right,  or  privilege,  or  subject  him  to  any  disability. 

5.   Application  of  Education  Acts 

(i)  The  powers  of  a  local  education  authority  under  this  Act 
shall  be  deemed  to  be  powers  of  that  authority  under  the  Educa- 
tion Acts,  1870  to  1903,  and  the  provisions  of  those  Acts  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  the  expenses  of  a  local  education  authority  are  to 
be  charged  and  defrayed,  and  as  to  borrowing,  and  as  to  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  amount  which  would  be  produced  by  any  rate  in 
the  pound  is  to  be  estimated,  shall  apply  to  expenses  incurred  and 


122  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

money  borrowed  under  this  Act,  and  to  the  estimate  of  the  produce 
of  any  rate  in  the  pound  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act. 

(2)  Any  expression  to  which  a  special  meaning  is  attached  in 
the  Education  Acts,  1870  to  1903,  shall  have  the  same  meaning 
in  this  Act,  except  that  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act  the  expression 
"  child  "  shall,  notwithstanding  anything  in  section  forty-eight  of 
the  Elementary  Education  Act,  1876,^  include  any  child  in  attend- 
ance at  a  public  elementary  school. 

6.  Provisio7i  as  to  Teachers 

No  teacher  seeking  employment  or  employed  in  a  public  elemen- 
tary school  shall  be  required  as  part  of  his  duties  to  supervise  or 
assist,  or  to  abstain  from  supervising  or  assisting,  in  the  provision 
of  meals,  or  in  the  collection  of  the  cost  thereof. 

7.  Application  to  Scotland 
This  Act  shall  not  apply  to  Scotland. 

8.   Title 

This  Act  may  be  cited  as  the  Education  (Provision  of  Meals) 
Act,  1906. 

Extract  22 

INTRODUCTION  OF  NOTIFICATIONS  OF  BIRTH  BILL,  1907 

{Lo7-d  Robert  Cecil,  Commons,  April  2j,  iQoy) 

Lord  R.  Cecil  ^  in  moving  for  leave  to  introduce  a  Bill  to  pro- 
vide for  the  early  notification  of  births,  said  that  he  had  taken  the 
unusual  course  of  asking  leave  under  the  ten  minutes  rule,  because 
of  the  very  great  gravity  of  the  evil  with  which  the  Bill,  however 

1  39  &  40  Vict.,  ch.  79. 

2  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  172,  col,  1582  sqq. 


CHILD  WELFARE  1 23 

imperfectly  and  however  modestly,  attempted  to  deal.  At  the  pres- 
ent moment  120,000  infants  under  one  year  of  age  died  in  this 
country  every  year,  and  it  was  no  exaggeration  to  say  that  of  these 
60,000  might  be  saved  if  proper  measures  were  taken.  Such  a 
state  of  things  required  the  very  earnest  consideration  of  the  House, 
for  it  amounted  to  this,  that  out  of  every  1000  children  born  in 
this  country  1 45  died  without  reaching  the  age  of  one  year ;  and 
there  were  particular  localities  in  which  as  many  as  250,  300,  or 
even  400  out  of  every  1000  born  died  at  that  early  age.  It  was  no 
exaggeration  to  say  that  half  of  them  might  be  saved ;  for  the  rate 
in  some  of  our  Colonies  was  no  higher  than  seventy  per  1000,  and 
in  some  of  our  own  counties  it  was  not  higher  than  eighty-four. 

The  seriousness  of  the  question  was  not  diminished  by  the  fact 
that  while  the  general  death-rate  in  this  country  had  been  much 
diminished  as  the  result  of  sanitary  measures,  the  infantile  death 
rate  remained  practically  stationary.  That  he  attributed  mainly  to 
two  causes  —  neglect  by  mothers  of  their  own  health  before  the 
birth  of  their  children,  and  neglect  of  the  children's  health  immedi- 
ately after  they  were  born.  He  did  not  suggest  for  a  moment  that 
the  neglect  was  due  to  wickedness  or  even  to  carelessness  exactly, 
but  it  was  in  most  cases  due  to  ignorance,  which  was  a  far  more 
potent  cause  of  infantile  mortality  than  the  more  commonly  assigned 
causes  of  parental  poverty  and  intemperance. 

Something  could  be  done  to  remedy  this  state  of  affairs  by  the 
provision  of  skilled  assistance  to  mothers  in  the  early  days  of 
motherhood,  and  many  health  societies  throughout  the  country 
had  charged  themselves  with  this  duty.  Remarkable  results  had 
been  achieved  in  Huddersfield  from  the  creditable  efforts  of  the 
ex-mayor.  But  under  the  existing  registration  law  six  weeks  might 
elapse  before  registration,  and  one-third  of  the  children  dying  in 
the  first  year  of  life  died  in  the  first  six  weeks ;  so  that  these  chil- 
dren were  dead  before  the  societies  to  which  he  referred  could 
know  that  they  had  been  born.  It  was  solely  with  a  view  to  rem- 
edy this  defect  that  he  had  been  asked  to  introduce  thi§  Bill,   It 


124  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

provided  that  within  forty-eight  hours  of  the  birth  of  every  child  a 
notification  was  to  be  made  in  the  simplest  way,  it  being  specially 
provided  that  it  might  be  made  by  post  card,  and  the  duty  of  noti- 
fying a  birth  was  thrown,  in  the  first  place,  on  the  father  of  the 
child  and,  failing  him,  on  any  one  who  had  been  in  attendance  on 
the  mother.  The  Bill  further  required  that  notification  of  children 
stillborn  should  be  made  as  well  as  of  those  born  alive. 

He  urged  the  House  to  consider  the  seriousness  of  the  evil  which 
the  Bill  was  designed,  he  would  not  say  to  cure,  but  in  some  de- 
gree to  mitigate.  This  was  a  non-Party  question,  and  he  ventured 
to  hope  that  the  Bill  would  be  regarded  as  absolutely  non-conten- 
tious. It  was  supported  by  hon.  Members  in  all  quarters  of  the 
House,  and  he  hoped  its  promoters  would  have  the  sympathetic 
support  of  the  Government  and  that  the  measure  might  be  passed 
into  law  before  the  close  of  the  present  session. 


Extract  2^ 

INTRODUCTION  OF  CHILDREN  BILL,  1908 

{lilr.  Herbert  Samuel^  Under-Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home 
Department,  Commotis,  February  lo,  igo8) 

Mr.  Samuel  ^  in  asking  leave  to  bring  in  a  Bill  "  to  consolidate 
and  amend  the  law  relating  to  the  protection  of  children  and  young 
persons,  reformatory  and  industrial  schools,  and  juvenile  offenders, 
and  otherwise  to  amend  the  law  with  respect  to  children  and  young 
persons,"  said :  This  is  the  first  reading  of  a  Bill  to  which  we  can 
give  no  narrower  title  than  that  of  "  Children  Bill."  The  present 
law  for  the  protection  of  children  and  the  treatment  of  juvenile 
offenders  is  in  some  confusion.  It  is  spread  over  a  large  number 
of  statutes,  and  it  urgently  needs  consolidation.  Experience  has 
shown  the  need  of  a  considerable  number  of  amendments  and 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  1S3,  col.  1432  sqq. 


CHILD  WELFARE  I25 

extensions  of  the  law.  The  Government  have  decided  not  to  intro- 
duce a  series  of  small  Bills  in  successive  years,  but  to  ask  Parliament 
to  enact,  in  one  large  and  comprehensive  measure,  a  thorough  codi- 
fication and  amendment  of  the  law  relating  to  children.  A  Bill  of 
this  scope  could  not,  in  a  crowded  session  like  this,  expect  to  pass 
into  law  unless  it  commanded,  more  or  less,  the  favour  of  all  sec- 
tions in  the  House,  and  we  have,  therefore,  excluded  from  it  all 
the  subjects  which  might  properly  be  described  as  controversial. 
Even  the  question  of  children  in  public-houses,  with  regard  to  which 
there  is  a  general  measure  of  assent,  we  have  thought  it  wiser  to 
defer  to  be  dealt  with  in  the  Licensing  Bill.  The  question  of  the 
employment  of  children,  whether  in  factories  or  elsewhere,  raises 
important  industrial  questions  on  which,  unhappily,  there  is  not 
complete  agreement.  The  question  of  education  naturally  be- 
longs to  the  Education  Acts,  and  there  are  other  subjects  which 
we  might  have  liked  to  include  but  which  we  have  been  obliged  to 
omit.  But,  even  with  these  omissions,  the  Bill  is  a  somewhat  vo- 
luminous one.  It  contains  119  clauses,  covers  seventy  pages,  and 
consolidates  twenty-two  statutes  and  parts  of  many  others,  together 
with  a  number  of  new  provisions.   .  .  . 

I'he  Bill  extends  to  the  whole  of  the  L)  nited  Kingdom.  Through 
all  its  parts  uniform  definitions  run.  A  child  is  a  person  under  the 
age  of  fourteen  years ;  a  young  person  is  a  person  above  the  age 
of  fourteen  and  under  the  age  of  sixteen.  The  first  part  of  the 
Bill  embodies  the  Infant  Life  Protection  Act,  1897,  which  was 
passed  to  stop  the  evils  of  baby  farming,  and  for  the  protection  of 
the  lives  of  infants  put  out  to  nurse.  That  Act  has  been  found  in 
practice  ineffective  in  many  respects.  There  are  many  holes  through 
which  evil-disposed  persons  may  escape  its  control,  but,  by  a  series 
of  detailed  amendments  we  stop  these  holes  and  strengthen  the 
control  of  the  Act.  .  .  . 

The  second  part  of  the  Bill  re-enacts  the  Prevention  of  Cruelty 
to  Children  Act,  1894,  with  a  large  number  of  amendments  mainly 
designed  to  strengthen  the  law  and  to  facilitate  the  action  of  those 


126  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

• 

societies  which  are  doing  such  admirable  work  in  the  three  king- 
doms for  the  prevention  of  cruelty  to  children.  I  will  mention  only 
two  of  the  chief  provisions  proposed  in  this  part  of  the  Bill.  Every 
year  some  1600  infants  meet  their  deaths  from  overlying,  a  waste 
of  infant  life  which  should  easily  be  preventible  and  which  ought 
not  to  be  allowed  to  continue.  We  propose,  in  such  cases,  since 
the  offence  is  not  one  of  wilful  cruelty,  but  of  negligence,  to  make 
the  penalty  a  light  one,  except  where  drunkenness  can  be  proved. 
An  equal  number  of  children  are  killed  year  by  year  from  burns 
and  scalds,  owing  to  their  being  left  in  rooms  with  unguarded  fires. 
We  impose  in  such  cases  also  a  similar  penalty,  except  where  it 
can  be  shown  that  reasonable  precautions  were  taken. 

The  proposals  of  the  third  part  of  the  Bill  deal  with  an  evil, 
growing  in  extent,  most  deleterious  to  child  life,  and  for  which 
public  opinion  almost  universally  demands  a  remedy.  I  refer  to 
the  evil  of  juvenile  smoking.  The  Committee  on  Physical  Deterio- 
ration recommended  a  legislative  remedy,  and  a  Committee  of 
the  House  of  Lords,  appointed  in  1906  specially  to  examine  this 
question,  after  hearing  much  medical  and  other  evidence,  made  a 
unanimous  and  a  very  emphatic  recommendation  in  the  same  sense. 
Many  countries  throughout  the  world  have  already  legislated  on 
this  subject.  We  propose  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  cigarettes  and 
cigarette  paper  to  children  under  the  age  of  sixteen,  to  prohibit 
persons  under  the  age  of  sixteen  from  smoking  in  streets  and  public 
places,  and  to  make  them  liable  for  the  first  offence  to  no  more 
than  a  reprimand,  but  for  subsequent  offences  to  a  light  fine.  We 
also  allow,  and  this  will  probably  prove  a  more  effective  provision, 
the  police  and  other  authorised  persons  to  confiscate  the  tobacco 
which  is  being  used  by  those  little  boys  who  are  found  smoking 
in  streets  and  public  places.  We  have  a  provision  also  for  dealing 
with  such  automatic  machines  for  the  sale  of  cigarettes  as  are  found 
to  be  extensively  used  by  juveniles. 

The  fourth  part  of  the  Bill  consolidates  the  nineteen  statutes 
which  now  contain  the  law  relating  to  reformatory  and  industrial 


CHILD  WELFARE  12/ 

schools.  The  changes  we  propose  are  too  many  and  too  minute 
to  deal  with  now,  but  I  would  like  to  mention  that  it  has  been  sug- 
gested that  the  age  for  committal  to  a  reformatory  should  be  raised 
above  the  present  figure  of  sixteen,  and  to  explain  that  we  are 
adopting  that  suggestion  only  because  we  consider  that  it  is  inad- 
visable to  mix  older  offenders  with  smaller  boys  and  girls,  and  be- 
cause my  right  hon.  Friend  the  Home  Secretary  hopes  to  introduce 
a  Bill  establishing  a  new  class  of  reformatories  for  these  older 
offenders. 

There  are  in  the  Bill  a  number  of  miscellaneous  clauses,  of  which 
I  will  only  mention  two.  From  time  to  time  cases  of  cruelty  and 
neglect  are  discovered  in  so-called  homes  for  children  which  are 
fraudulent  institutions,  conducted  by  persons  who  live  on  the  char- 
itable contributions  which  are  intended  for  the  destitute  children 
whom  they  have  collected.  There  is  no  right  of  entry  under  the 
present  law  to  such  institutions,  and  the  Bill  provides  that,  where 
a  home  is  kept  for  destitute  children  and  is  supported  by  charitable 
contributions,  there  shall  be  a  right  of  entry  for  persons  authorised 
by  the  Secretary  of  State.  Regard  will  be  had  in  the  selection  of 
such  persons  to  the  religious  denomination  by  which  such  homes 
are  being  maintained.  The  other  clause  is  one  designed  to  solve 
the  difficult  and  long-standing  problem  of  the  vagrant  child.  There 
are  some  hundreds  of  children  who  are  now  continually  taken  about 
the  country,  deprived  of  any  opportunity  of  schooling,  educated 
only  in  vagabondage,  and  denied  many  of  the  most  elementary 
benefits  of  civilised  life.  We  propose  a  clause  which,  we  hope,  will 
stop  that  once  and  for  all.  We  adapt  the  machinery  of  the  Com- 
pulsoiy  Education  Acts,  which  are  at  present  found  to  be  inap- 
plicable to  these  cases,  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  vagrant 
child. 

The  last  part  of  the  Bill,  which  has  to  do  with  juvenile  offenders, 
is  based  upon  three  main  principles.  The  first  is  that  the  child 
offender  ought  to  be  kept  separate  from  the  adult  criminal,  and 
should  receive  at  the  hands  of  the  law  a  treatment  differentiated 


128  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

to  suit  his  special  needs  —  that  the  courts  should  be  agencies  for 
the  rescue  as  well  as  the  punishment  of  children.  We  require  the 
establishment  throughout  the  country  of  juvenile  courts  —  that  is 
to  say,  children's  cases  shall  be  heard  in  a  court  held  in  a  sepa- 
rate room  or  at  a  separate  time  from  the  courts  which  are  held 
for  adult  cases,  and  that  the  public  who  are  not  concerned  in  the 
cases  shall  be  excluded  from  admission.  In  London  we  propose  to 
appoint  by  administrative  action  a  special  children's  magistrate  to 
visit  in  turn  a  circuit  of  courts.  Further,  we  require  police  authori- 
ties throughout  the  whole  of  the  country  to  establish  places  of 
detention  to  which  children  shall  be  committed  on  arrest,  if  they 
are  not  bailed,  and  on  remand  or  commitment  for  trial,  instead  of 
being  committed  to  prison.  A  great  many  towns  have  already  pro- 
vided places  of  detention,  and  we  require  that  this  practice  should 
be  made  universal.  We  anticipate  that  a  Treasury  grant  will  be 
made  for  the  maintenance  of  children,  in  places  of  detention,  on 
remand. 

The  second  principle  on  which  this  Bill  is  based  is  that  the 
parent  of  the  child  offender  must  be  made  to  feel  more  responsible 
for  the  wrong-doing  of  his  child.  He  cannot  be  allowed  to  neglect 
the  up-bringing  of  his  children,  and  having  committed  the  grave 
offence  of  throwing  on  society  a  diild  criminal,  wash  his  hands  of 
the  consequences  and  escape  scot  free.  We  require  the  attendance 
in  court  of  the  parent  in  all  cases  where  the  child  is  charged,  where 
there  is  no  valid  reason  to  the  contrary,  and  we  considerably  en- 
large the  powers,  already  conferred  upon  the  magistrates  by  the 
Youthful  Offenders  Act  of  1901,  to  require  the  parent,  where  it  is 
just  to  do  so,  to  pay  the  fines  inflicted  for  the  offence  which  his 
child  has  committed. 

The  third  principle  which  we  had  in  view  in  framing  this  part 
of  the  Bill  is  that  the  commitment  of  children  in  the  common  gaols, 
no  matter  what  the  offence  may  be  that  is  committed,  is  an  unsuit- 
able penalty  to  impose.  The  child  is  made  to  feel  for  the  rest  of 
his  life  that  he  is  regarded  as  a  criminal  and  belongs  to  the  criminal 


CHILD  WELFARE  1 29 

classes,  and  at  the  same  time  that  vague  dread  of  the  unknown 
penalties  of  imprisonment,  which  is  one  of  the  most  powerful  de- 
terrents of  crime,  becomes  useless  and  nugator)'.  After  consulta- 
tion with  many  of  the  chief  judicial  and  legal  authorities  of  the 
country,  the  Government  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  time 
has  now  arrived  when  Parliament  can  be  asked  to  abolish  the  im- 
prisonment of  children  altogether,  and  we  extend  this  proposal  to 
the  age  of  sixteen,  with  a  few  carefully  defined  and  necessary  ex- 
ceptions. Many  methods  will  still  be  left  in  the  hands  of  the  courts 
for  dealing  with  delinquent  children,  but  where  none  of  the  ordinary 
methods  are  suitable,  our  Bill  will  permit  the  committal  of  the  child 
for  a  short  period,  under  Home  Office  rules  and  a  proper  system 
of  classification,  to  the  places  of  detention  which  have  to  be  pro- 
vided for  remand  cases.  Such  committals  we  anticipate  will  be 
exceedingly  few,  and  a  similar  Treasury  grant  will  be  in  respect 
of  them.  .  .  . 


CHAPTER   IV 

OLD  AGE  PENSIONS 

[Together  with  the  problem  of  child  welfare,  that  of  the  aged 
and  infirm  pressed  for  solution.  Since  1834  the  Government  had 
dealt  with  the  problem  along  three  different  lines.  Up  to  187 1 
there  was  an  indiscriminate  use  of  general  workhouses  for  all 
classes  of  the  indigent  aged,  modified  to  a  slight  extent  by  supply- 
ing doles  as  outdoor  relief.  An  even  harsher  method  of  dealing 
with  these  people  was  instituted  in  187 1  :  namely,  that  of  applying 
a  workhouse  test,  the  assumption  being  that  the  deserving  could 
maintain  themselves  out  of  their  own  savings,  or  be  maintained 
by  their  relatives,  aided  by  charitable  gifts,  and  that  only  the  unde- 
serving would  apply  for  admission  to  the  workhouses.  As  a  result 
of  the  investigations  and  reports  of  the  Royal  Commissioners  of 
1893-1895,  a  new  policy  was  adopted,  at  least  in  theory, — 
either  outdoor  relief  fully  adequate  to  all  the  deserving  aged,  or 
good  comfortable  quarters  in  some  institution.  The  actual  opera- 
tion of  each  of  these  policies  had  been  far  from  satisfactory ;  and 
the  labour  interests  began  to  urge  partial  solutions  along  more 
radical  lines. 

Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain  succeeded  in  pledging  the  Unionist 
party  to  support  the  principle  of  old  age  pensions,  but  failed  to 
control  a  majority  sufficient  to  pass  such  a  measure  through  Par- 
liament ;  and  the  only  contribution  to  the  subject  by  the  Balfour 
Government  was  the  constitution  of  a  Poor  Law  Commission  to 
study  and  report  upon  the  whole  problem  of  the  aged  and  infirm. 

Very  soon  after  the  assembling  of  the  Parliament  in  1906,  a 
resolution  was  introduced  by  Labour  members  asking  for  the 

130 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  I3I 

provision  of  old  age  pensions  from  public  funds.  The  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  expressed  the  complete  sympathy  of  the  Liberal 
Government  with  the  proposed  reform,  but  intimated  that  he  could 
not  then  provide  the  necessary  funds.  In  the  course  of  the  debate 
Mr.  John  Burns  said  that  in  his  judgment  perhaps  the  best,  sim- 
plest, and  fairest  scheme  would  be  one  under  which  every  person 
would  receive  5  s.  a  week  at  sixty-five  years  of  age ;  the  Poor  Law 
Commission  would  report  before  long,  and  then  the  Government 
would  be  in  possession  of  sufificient  information  to  justify  their 
making  a  beginning,  and  it  was  their  intention  to  take  the  matter 
up  as  soon  as  that  should  be  possible.  The  resolution  was  carried 
unanimously. 

Agitation  in  favour  of  old  age  pensions  continued  throughout 
1907.  On  May  10  of  that  year  a  bill  was  introduced  by  Mr. 
W.  H.  Lever,  providing  for  a  pension  of  5  s.  a  week  payable, 
upon  personal  application,  to  persons  sixty -five  years  of  age  and 
upwards,  from  funds  supplied  nine-tenths  by  the  Exchequer  and 
one-tenth  by  local  taxation.  A  graduated  system  of  income  tax, 
beginning  with  a  charge  of  2d.  in  the  pound  on  every  man 
earning  20s.  weekly  and  not  necessarily  stopping  at  is.  in  the 
pound  in  the  case  of  the  rich  man,  would  furnish  sufficient 
funds.  An  amendment  to  reject  Mr.  Lever's  Bill  was  negatived 
232  to  19,  but  the  proposal  never  got  by  second  reading  in 
the  Commons. 

On  April  18,  1907,  Mr.  Asquith,  in  making  the  customary  Budget 
statement  as  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  pledged  the  Ministry  to 
deal  with  old  age  pensions  during  the  next  session  of  Parliament 
{Extract  24) .  A  year  later  Mr.  Asquith  succeeded  Sir  Henry 
Campbell-Bannerman  as  Prime  Minister  and  First  Lord  of  the 
Treasury,  and  Mr.  David  Lloyd  George  was  transferred  from  the 
Presidency  of  the  Board  of  Trade  to  the  office  of  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer.  Mr.  Asquith,  however,  made  the  Budget  statement 
on  May  7,  1908,  in  the  course  of  which  he  took  occasion  to  revert 
to  the  social  problem,  especially  to  old  age  pensions  (^Extract  2j). 


132  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

The  Government  measure  was  presented  to  the  Commons  on 
May  28,  1908.  Its  second  reading  was  moved  by  Mr.  Lloyd  George 
on  June  15  {Extract  26),  and  opposed  by  Mr.  Harold  Cox  {Extract 
2"/)  and  Lord  Robert  Cecil  {Extract  28),  who  endeavoured  unsuc- 
cessfully to  pass  an  amendment  condemning  expenditure  of  "  tax- 
payers' money  in  giving  subsidies  to  persons  selected  by  arbitrary 
standards  of  age,  income,  and  character." 

When  the  Committee  stage  of  the  Bill  was  begun  in  the  House 
of  Commons  on  June  23,  many  of  the  Conservatives  took  up  an 
attitude  of  grave  suspicion  if  not  downright  hostility,  and  several 
of  them  proposed  amendments,  which,  had  they  been  adopted, 
would  have  defeated  the  objects  of  the  measure.  Amendments 
moved  by  Lord  Robert  Cecil  and  Mr.  Bowles,  altering  the  wording 
of  the  first  clause  so  as  to  stamp  the  measure  as  experimental,  were 
rejected  respectively  by  293  to  55  and  341  to  103,  there  being  some 
cross-voting.  Another  amendment,  moved  by  Mr.  Bowles,  suspend- 
ing the  pension  in  the  absence  of  the  pensioner  from  the  United 
Kingdom,  was  ultimately  rejected  by  376  to  10 1,  it  being  explained 
by  Mr.  Lloyd  George  that  short  absences  would  not  disqualify, 
though  permanent  removal  would  involve  forfeiture.  An  amend- 
ment moved  by  Viscount  Castlereagh,  embodying  the  principle  of 
a  sliding  scale  according  to  means,  was  opposed  by  the  Labour 
members  as  insufficient,  though  they  would  accept  a  scale  ranging 
from  I  OS.  to  15  s.  per  week.  Lord  Robert  Cecil  proposed  another 
amendment,  providing  that  the  scheme  should  be  contributory 
under  regulations  to  be  made  by  the  Treasury.  This  was  rejected 
by  346  to  86  after  a  speech  by  Mr.  Buxton,  Postmaster-General, 
repeating  the  Ministerial  objections  to  the  contributory  principle 
{Extract  26). 

Then  the  Unionists  resorted  to  moving  amendments  to  the  Bill 
which  would  largely  increase  its  cost.  Thus,  an  amendment  moved 
by  Mr.  Mildmay  directed  the  pension  authority  to  disregard  sums 
under  ^40  annually,  received  in  consideration  of  previous  pay- 
ment, from  a  friendly  society  or  trade  union ;  and  Mr.  Chaplin 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  133 

met  an  objection  against  distinguishing  between  various  forms  of 
thrift  by  moving  to  extend  the  amendment  so  as  to  cover  all 
other  approved  provision  against  old  age,  sickness,  or  infirmity. 
This  was  supported  by  several  Opposition  and  Labour  members, 
whereupon  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  said  that  the  Oppo- 
sition thought  they  were  putting  the  Government  into  a  hole. 
Their  policy  had  been  to  move  wild,  illogical,  irrational  amend- 
ments, regardless  of  the  cost,  in  order  to  say  to  every  class  in  turn, 
"  We  voted  for  you  and  those  wicked  radicals  voted  against  you." 
Later,  he  said  that  Mr.  Mildmay's  amendment  would  add  100,000 
pensioners  and  ;!^i,3oo,ooo  annually  to  the  cost;  Mr.  Chaplin's 
^2,600,000.  The  amendment,  in  the  form  given  it  by  Mr.  Chaplin, 
was  rejected  by  243  to  113. 

The  thinly-veiled  hostility  of  the  Unionists  to  the  Government 
Bill  was  displayed  in  the  Commons  on  the  occasion  of  the  third 
reading  on  July  9  when  Mr.  Arthur  J.  Balfour  offered  his  sceptical 
apology  (^Extract  2g),  to  which  the  Labourites  replied  eloquently 
through  Mr.  William  Crooks  {Extrad  jo).  On  the  final  division, 
only  1 2  Unionists  voted  for  the  Bill,  1 1  voted  against  it,  and 
140  abstained. 

What  the  Lords  would  do  with  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Bill 
was  for  some  time  problematical.  Litroduced  in  their  House  on 
July  10,  it  came  up  for  second  reading  ten  days  later.  The  Earl 
of  Wemyss  in  a  remarkable  speech  (^Extract  ji)  at  once  moved  an 
amendment  declaring  such  legislation  unwise  pending  the  issue  of 
the  Report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commission.  All  manner  of  financial 
and  moral  reasons  were  assigned  against  the  Government  measure 
by  various  speakers,  among  whom  were  the  Earl  of  Cromer, 
Viscount  St.  Aldwyn,  Lord  Avebury,  and  the  Earl  of  Halsbury. 
Lord  Rosebery,  while  profoundly  disquieted  as  to  the  effect  of  the 
Bill,  urged  the  Lords  (^Extract  J2)  not  to  incur  the  risk  of  a  dis- 
pute with  the  House  of  Commons  by  rejecting  a  measure  that  was 
largely  fiscal.  Two  prominent  Churchmen,  the  archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, and  the  bishop  of  Ripon,  defended  the  Bill  {Extract  jj). 


134  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Lord  Lansdowne,  the  Tory  leader,  expressed  grave  opposition  to 
the  measure,  but  counselled  its  adoption  as  good  party  tactics.  It 
must  be  borne  in  mind  that  it  was  in  1908  that  the  Lords  rejected 
the  important  Licensing  Bill  which  had  passed  the  lower  House 
with  large  majorities. 

The  Old  Age  Pensions  Bill  passed  third  reading  in  the  House  of 
Lords  on  July  30,  and  after  the  House  of  Commons  had  rejected 
various  Lords'  amendments,  the  measure  received  the  royal  assent 
on  August  I,  1908.    It  is  given  below  as  Extract  J4. 

An  important  amendment  was  enacted  in  1 9 1 1 ,  clarifying  and 
extending  several  provisions  of  the  major  Act.  It  is  inserted  as 
Ext7-act  jj.] 


Extract  24 

PROMISE  OF  OLD  AGE  PENSIONS 

{Mr.  H.  H.  Asqiiith,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Commons, 
April  18,  igoy) 

Mr.  Asquith  ^ :  .  .  .  It  is,  I  think,  a  mistake  to  treat  the  annual 
Budget  as  if  it  were  a  thing  by  itself,  and  not,  as  it  is,  or  as  it  cer- 
tainly ought  to  be,  an  integral  part  and  a  necessary  link  in  a  con- 
nected and  coherent  chain  of  policy.  In  my  opinion,  and  I  think  it 
is  an  opinion  that  will  be  shared  by  a  great  number  of  hon.  Gentle- 
men opposite,  the  country  has  reached  a  stage  in  which,  whether 
we  look  merely  at  its  fiscal  or  at  its  social  exigencies,  we  cannot 
afford  to  drift  along  the  stream  and  treat  each  year's  finance  as  if 
it  were  self-contained.  The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  in  other 
words,  ought  to  budget,  not  for  one  year,  but  for  several  years.  It 
is  in  that  spirit  that  the  proposals  which  I  am  going  presently  to 
submit  to  the  Committee  have  been  conceived,  and  it  is  from  that 
point  of  view  that  I  ask  they  shall  be  judged. 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  172,  col.  1175  sqq. 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  I  35 

What,  then,  are  the  lines  for  financial  progress  which  this  Gov- 
ernment, and  a  majority  in  this  House,  are  bound  by  their  pledges 
and  by  their  convictions  to  pursue  ?  First  and  foremost,  we  are 
under  an  immediate  obligation,  often  insisted  upon  when  we  sat 
upon  the  other  side  in  the  last  Parliament,  and  reiterated  certainly 
by  me  over  and  over  again  at  the  general  election  after  which  I 
had  assumed  the  office  of  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  — 
an  immediate  obligation  of  reinstating  and  improving  the  national 
credit.  ...  A  substantial  and  exceptional  effort  to  effect  a  further 
reduction  in  the  Debt  is,  for  the  moment,  one  of  the  paramount 
duties  of  the  Government. 

But  behind  and  beyond  this  there  lies  the  whole  still  unconquered 
territory  of  social  reform.  Social  reform  may  be  regarded,  accord- 
ing to  the  point  of  view  from  which  you  look  at  it,  as  a  luxury  or 
as  a  necessity,  but  in  any  case  it  is  expensive.  It  has  to  be  paid  for. 
Someone  must  be  prepared  to  meet  the  bill.  Well,  now,  this  is  a 
House  of  Commons  which  was  elected  more  clearly  and  definitely 
than  any  other  House  in  our  history  in  the  hope  and  belief  on  the 
part  of  the  electors  that  it  would  find  the  road  and  provide  the 
means  for  social  reform.  No  doubt  social  reform  is  a  phrase  vague 
in  itself,  which  carries  different  meanings  to  different  minds.  But 
there  are  some  things  which  it  certainly  means  to  all  of  us  who  sit 
upon  this  side  of  the  House,  and  I  fancy  to  a  good  many  who  sit 
opposite.  I  myself,  for  instance  —  if  I  may  refer  to  myself  —  am 
not  what  is  called  a  Socialist.  I  believe  in  the  right  of  every  man 
face  to  face  with  the  State  to  make  the  best  of  himself,  and,  sub- 
ject to  the  limitation  that  he  does  not  become  a  nuisance  or  a  dan- 
ger to  the  community,  to  make  less  than  the  best  of  himself.  This 
world  is  much  too  full  of  wrong-doing,  and  of  injustice,  and  of  un- 
merited suffering ;  but,  in  my  judgment,  the  way  of  escape  is  not 
to  be  found  in  any  solution,  or  so-called  solution,  which,  by  slowly 
but  surely  drying  up  the  reservoir  which  gives  vitality  to  human 
personality  and  human  purpose,  will  in  the  long  run  leave  the  uni- 
verse a  more  sterile  place.    I  say  this  in  no  polemical  spirit,  not  at 


136  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

all,  but  simply  by  way  of  emphasising  the  fact  that  to  all  of  us  — 
people  like  myself,  who  may  be  regarded  by  some  of  my  hon.  friends 
below  the  gangway  as  a  lukewarm  Moderate  —  there  is  nothing 
that  calls  so  loudly  or  so  imperiously  as  the  possibilities  of  social 
reform.  Just  let  me,  in  order  to  make  plain  what  I  am  going  to 
say,  invite  the  House  to  look  at  two  sets  of  figures  in  our  modern 
community,  whose  appeal  is  irresistible. 

First  of  all  there  is  the  child  ^  for  whom  heredity  and  parental 
care  have  perhaps  done  nothing  or  worse  than  nothing.  And  yet  it 
is  the  raw  material,  upon  the  fashioning  of  which  depends  whether 
it  shall  add  to  the  common  stock  of  wealth  and  intelligence  and 
goodness,  or  whether  it  shall  be  cast  aside  as  a  waste  product  in 
the  social  rubbish  heap.  The  State  has  long  recognised  that  it  can- 
not pass  by  that  appeal  with  folded  arms.  It  has  put  the  child  to 
school,  it  keeps  the  child  at  school,  and  (much  as  it  shocks  some 
excellent  people)  after  the  legislation  of  last  year,  if  the  poor  body 
of  the  child  is  benumbed  with  cold  or  pinched  with  hunger  so  that 
it  can  get  no  benefit  from  its  lessons,  it  will  even  go  so  far  as  to 
help  to  provide  it  with  bread.  Does  the  House  realise  what  the 
recognition  of  that  means  on  the  part  of  the  State,  what  every  one 
of  us  now  agrees  is  a  duty,  though  it  was  neglected  and  passed  by 
generation  after  generation  by  humane  and  far-sighted  statesmen  ? 
Does  anyone  realise  what  the  performance  of  that  duty  has  cost 
this  community  ?  Let  me  give  two  or  three  figures  which  I  think 
very  striking.  In  the  year  1869-70,  the  last  year  of  what  I  may 
call  the  old'  system,  the  total  cost  of  education  to  the  public  in  the 
form  of  Parliamentary  grants  —  for  of  course  there  was  no  rate-aid 
at  that  time  —  was  ^721,000.  What  was  it  in  the  year  1906-7  ? 
Your  Parliamentary  grants,  if  you  add  the  Exchequer  contributions, 
as  you  ought  to,  were  ;^i3,359,ooo ;  sums  raised  by  local  rates 
were  ;^ii,785,ooo ;  a  total  of  ;^25,i44,ooo.  That  is  what  it  has 
cost  the  State  to  recognise  its  duty  to  the  children  of  the  commu- 
nity.  I  do  not  say  that  every  penny  or  every  pound  of  that  money 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  107. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  1 37 

is  well  or  wisely  spent.  I  rejoice  to  think  that  we  have  at  the  head 
of  the  Board  of  Education  my  right  hon.  Friend  the  President,  a 
severe  economist,  who  subjects  the  whole  of  this  expenditure  to  a 
most  searching  review.  But  this  I  do  say,  that  there  is  not  a  man 
who  sits  on  either  side  of  the  House  who  is  prepared  substantially 
.to  recede  from  the  performance  of  this  enormous  duty.  Well,  that 
is  one  thing. 

There  is  another  thing,  nearer  the  other  end  of  the  journey  of 
life,  which  makes  an  equally  strong,  though  hitherto  an  unavailing, 
appeal  both  to  the  interest  and  to  the  conscience  of  society  —  I 
mean  the  figure  ^of  the  man  or  woman  who,  perhaps,  spent  out 
with  a  life  of  unrequited  labour,  finds  himself  confronted  in  old 
age,  without  fault  or  demerit  of  his  own,  with  the  prospect  of 
physical  want  and  the  sacrifice  of  self-respect.  Sir,  I  never  gave, 
nor,  so  far  as  I  know,  did  any  of  my  colleagues  on  this  Bench  give, 
any  pledge  at  the  elections  on  the  subject  of  what  is  called  old  age 
pensions.  We  knew  something  of  the  magnitude  of  the  problem, 
and  we  thought  it  wrong  to  raise  expectations  without  the  knowl- 
edge that  they  could  be  met.  Nor  do  I  now  commit  myself  or  any 
of  my  colleagues  to  any  specific  scheme,  although  both  my  right  hon. 
Friend  the  Prime  Minister  and  myself  have  laid  down  certain  con- 
ditions to  which,  in  our  judgment,  any  practical  proposal  must 
conform.  Whatever  is  done  in  this  matter,  as  I  have  said  before 
in  this  House,  must  be  done  by  steps  and  stages,  and  cannot  be 
achieved  at  a  single  blow.  But  this  I  do  say,  and  I  wish  to  say  it 
with  all  the  emphasis  of  which  I  am  capable,  speaking  for  the  whole 
of  my  colleagues  who  sit  upon  this  Bench,  that  in  the  sphere  of 
finance  we  regard  this  as  the  most  serious  and  the  most  urgent  of 
all  the  demands  for  social  reform  ;  and  that  it  is  our  hope  —  I  will 
go  further  and  say  it  is  our  intention,  before  the  close  of  this  Par- 
liament, yes,  before  the  close  of  the  next  session  of  this  Parlia- 
ment, if  we  are  allowed  to  have  our  way  (it  is  a  large  "  if  ")  —  to 
lay  the  firm  foundations  of  this  reform.   .   .   . 


138  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  2^ 

RENEWED  PROMISE  OF  OLD  AGE  PENSIONS 

{Air.  H.  H.  Asqitith,  Prime  Minister  and  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury^ 
Commons^  May  7,  igoS) 

Mr.  Asquith  ^ :  .  .  .  Last  year,  in  introducing  the  Budget,  I 
said  that  this  Parliament  and  this  Government  had  come  here 
pledged  to  social  reform,  and  I  pointed  to  two  figures  in  our  mod- 
ern society  that  make  an  especially  strong  and,  indeed,  an  irre- 
sistible appeal,  not  only  to  our  sympathy,  but  to  something  more 
practical,  a  sympathy  translated  into  a  concrete  and  constructive 
policy  of  social  and  financial  effort.  One  is  the  figure  of  a  child. 
I  reminded  the  House  that  in  less  than  forty  years  —  since  1870 
—  you  have  added  to  your  annual  provision  for  the  education  of 
the  children  of  this  country  out  of  taxes  and  rates  an  annual  sum 
of  over  ;^2  4,000,000  sterling.  There  is  not  one  of  us  who  would 
go  back  upon  that. 

The  other  figure  is  the  figure  of  old  age,  still  unprovided  for 
except  for  casual  and  unorganised  effort,  or,  by  what  is  worse, 
invidious  dependence  upon  Poor  Law  relief.  I  said  then  that  we 
hoped  and  intended  this  year  to  lay  firm  the  foundations  of  a  wiser 
and  a  humaner  policy.  With  that  view,  as  the  Committee  may  re- 
member, I  set  aside  ^1,500,000,  which  was  temporarily  applied  to 
the  reduction  of  debt,  and  I  anticipated  that  that  other  ;^7  50,000 
which,  through  the  activity  of  the  Inland  Revenue,  has  been  swept 
into  the  old  Sinking  Fund  of  last  year,  would  also  be  available. 
I  propose  now  to  show  how  we  intend  to  redeem  the  promises 
which  I  then  made. 

I  need  not  remind  the  Committee  that  this  question  in  one  shape 
or  another  has  been  before  the  country  now  for  the  best  part  of 
thirty  years.    The  first  schemes  that  were  put  forward  proceeded 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  1S8,  col.  445  sqq. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  1 39 

on  the  footing  either  of  compulsory  or  voluntary  insurance,  accom- 
panied and  fortified  by  State  aid.  The  Royal  Commission  on  the 
Aged  Poor  in  1895  reported  adversely  to  all  the  proposals  which 
had  up  to  that  time  been  made.  There  followed  a  series  of  in- 
quiries into  schemes  for  granting  immediate  pensions  to  the  aged 
and  deserving  poor.  There  was  Lord  Rothschild's  Committee, 
there  was  a  Select  Committee  of  this  House  presided  over  by  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman  the  Member  for  Wimbledon  in  1899,  and 
there  was  Sir  Edward  Hamilton's  Departmental  Committee  of 
1900,  and  again  a  Select  Committee  of  this  House  in  1903.  Much 
valuable  information  was  accumulated  and  classified  in  the  course 
of  these  inquiries,  with  the  result,  I  think,  that  all  the  material  facts 
may  now  be  said  to  have  been  ascertained.  But  up  to  this  moment 
nothing  has  been  done,  nothing  at  all. 

In  the  meantime  other  countries  have  been  making  experiments. 
The  German  system,  which  is  one  of  compulsory  State-aided  assur- 
ance, has  been  in  existence  since  1889.  Under  it  pensions  averag- 
ing a  little  over  £16  13s.  a  year  are  paid  to  insured  persons  of  the 
age  of  seventy  and  upwards.  The  State  contribution  amounts  to 
less  than  40  per  cent  of  the  whole,  and  it  would  seem  that  in  1907 
not  more  than  126,000  persons  out  of  a  population  of  over  52 
millions  were  in  receipt  of  old  age  pensions. 

More  instruction,  I  think,  for  our  purposes  is  to  be  derived  from 
the  legislation  initiated  in  Denmark  in  189 1,  in  New  Zealand  in 
1898,  and  subsequently  in  New  South  Wales  and  Victoria.    These 
systems,  though  differing  widely  in  their  details,  have  several  im- 
portant features  in  common.    In  the  first  place,  they  do  not  depend\. 
for  their  application  upon  either  voluntary  or  compulsory  contribu-     \ 
tion  on  the  part  of  the  pensioner.    In  the  next  place,  they  are        / 
limited  in  all  cases  to  persons  whose  income  or  property  is  below  a      / 
prescribed  figure ;  and,  thirdly,  in  all  cases  they  impose  some  test    / 
or  other,  varying  in  stringency  and  in  complexity,  of  character  and  / 
desert  in  regard  to  such  matters,  for  instance,  as  past  criminality/ 
or  pauperism.    Although  both  in  Denmark  and  in  New  Zealana 


I40  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  expenditure  upon  the  pensions  has,  in  the  course  of  time, 
exhibited  a  tendency  to  increase  beyond  the  original  estimate,  yet 
the  cost  of  administration  has  turned  out  to  be  relatively  small, 
amounting  in  New  Zealand  in  1907  to  not  more  than  1.67  per 
cent ;  and  I  think  I  may  say  that  in  none  of  these  communities 
is  there  any  dissatisfaction  either  with  the  principles  or  with  the 
working  of  the  law,  and  certainly  no  disposition  to  go  back  to  the 
state  of  things  which  prevailed  before  old  age  pensions  were  set  up. 
His  Majesty's  present  Government  came  into  power  and  went 
through  the  last  general  election  entirely  unpledged  in  regard  to 
this  matter,  not  that  they  were  insensible  to  its  importance  or  to 
its  urgency,  but  they  felt  it  right  to  enter  into  no  binding  engage- 
ment until  they  had  had  full  time  to  survey  the  problem  in  all  its 
aspects,  and  —  what  is  still  more  important  —  to  lay  a  solid  finan- 
cial foundation  for  any  future  structure  it  might  be  possible  to 
raise.  It  was  accordingly  not  until  we  had  seen  our  way  to  make 
some  substantial  provision  for  the  reduction  of  the  national  liabili- 
ties that  I  found  myself  able  to  announce  in  the  Budget  of  last 
year  that  this  year  it  was  our  intention  to  make  a  beginning  —  and 
more  than  a  beginning  I  never  promised  —  in  the  creation  of  a 
sound  and  workable  scheme.   .   .   . 

Extract  26 

SECOND   READING   OF   OLD   AGE   PENSIONS    BILL 

(yJ/r.  David  Lloyd  George,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer^  Commotis, 
June  /J,  igo8) 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  ^ :  .  .  .  The  scheme  is  necessarily  an  in- 
complete one.  We  have  never  professed  that  it  was  complete  and 
dealt  with  the  whole  problem  ;  we  wished  it  to  be  treated  as  an  in- 
complete one,  and  to  be  considered  as  such.  It  is  purely  the  first 
step,  and  I  may  even  say  that  it  is  necessarily  an  experiment. 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  196,  col.  564  sqq. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  141 

The  second  observation  I  should  like  to  make  is  this,  that  those 
who  have  criticised  most  severely  the  disqualifications  which  we 
have  introduced  into  the  Bill  are  those  who  are  opposed  to  the 
principle  of  the  payment  of  old  age  pensions  at  the,  expense  of 
the  State  at  all.  Therefore  I  should  invite  hon.  Members  to  con- 
sider very  cautiously  those  criticisms  when  they  recollect  the  quarter 
from  which  in  the  main  they  have  come. 

The  first  general  criticism  is  that  this  is  a  non-contributory 
scheme.  I  am  not  sure  that  that  is  not  the  effect  of  the  Amend- 
ments of  the  noble  Lord  the  Member  for  Marylebone  [Lord 
Robert  Cecil]  and  my  hon.  Friend  the  Member  for  Preston  [Mr. 
Harold  Cox]  —  these  two  anarchist  leaders.^  I  demur  altogether 
to  the  division  of  the  schemes  into  contributory  and  non-contribu- 
tory. So  long  as  you  have  taxes  imposed  upon  commodities  which 
are  consumed  practically  by  every  family  in  the  country  there  is  no 
such  thing  as  a  non-contributory  scheme.  You  tax  tea  and  coffee, 
sugar,  beer,  and  tobacco,  and  you  get  a  contribution  from  practically 
every  family  in  the  land  one  way  or  another.  So,  therefore,  when 
a  scheme  is  financed  out  of  public  funds  it  is  as  much  a  contribu- 
tory scheme  as  a  scheme  which  is  financed  directly  by  means  of 
contributions  arranged  on  the  German  or  any  other  basis.  A  work- 
man who  has  contributed  health  and  strength,  vigour  and  skill,  to 
the  creation  of  the  wealth  by  which  taxation  is  borne  has  made  his 
contribution  already  to  the  fund  which  is  to  give  him  a  pension 
when  he  is  no  longer  fit  to  create  that  wealth.  Therefore  I  object 
altogether  to  the  general  division  of  these  schemes  into  contributory 
and  non-contributory  schemes. 

There  is,  however,  a  class  of  scheme  which  is  known  as  a  con- 
tributory one.  There  is  the  German  scheme,  in  which  the  workmen 
pay  into  a  fund.  It  is  rather  a  remarkable  fact  that  most  social 
reformers  who  have  taken  up  this  question  have  at  first  favoured 
contributory  schemes,  but  a  closer  examination  has  almost  invaria- 
bly led  them  to  abandon  them  on  the  ground  that  they  are  unequal 

1  Cf.  infra,  Extracts  27  and  2S. 


142  ■     BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

in  their  treatment  of  the  working  class,  cumbersome,  and  very  ex- 
pensive, and  in  a  country  like  ours  hopelessly  impracticable.  .  .  . 
Let  me  give  you  now  two  or  three  considerations  why,  in  my  judg- 
ment, a  contributory  scheme  is  impossible  in  this  country.  In  the 
first  place,  it  would  practically  exclude  women  from  its  benefits. 
Out  of  the  millions  of  members  of  friendly  societies  there  is  but 
a  small  proportion,  comparatively,  of  women.  Another  considera- 
tion is  that  the  vast  majority  are  not  earning  anything  and  cannot 
pay  their  contributions.  The  second  reason  is  that  the  majority  of 
the  workingmen  are  unable  to  deflect  from  their  weekly  earnings 
a  sufficient  sum  of  money  to  make  adequate  provision  for  old  age 
in  addition  to  that  which  they  are  now  making  for  sickness,  in- 
firmity, and  unemployment.  I  do  not  know  what  the  average 
weekly  wage  in  this  country  is ;  we  have  not  had  a  wage  census 
since  1886.  I  hope  the  Board  of  Trade  will  soon  be  able  to  pub- 
lish the  result  of  the  wages  census  initiated  some  months  ago,  but 
I  do  not  suppose  we  shall  have  the  Returns  in  time  for  our  debates 
on  this  Bill.  The  average  weekly  wage  in  1886  was  24s.  gd.,  and 
57  per  cent  of  the  working  classes  in  this  country  were  earning 
25s.  or  less.  It  is  quite  clear,  therefore,  that  out  of  such  wages 
they  cannot  make  provision  for  sickness,  for  all  the  accidents  and 
expenses  of  life,  and  also  set  aside  a  sufficient  sum  to  provide  a 
competence  for  old  age  as  well.  Take  the  agricultural  labourer 
with  his  15  s.  or  i6s.  a  week.  How  can  he  set  aside  4d.  a  week 
for  a  period  of  forty  years,  in  addition  to  v/hat  he  has  to  set  aside 
already  for  the  purpose  of  sickness  or  infirmity  ?  .  .  . 

The  provision  which  is  made  for  the  sick  and  unemployed  is 
grossly  inadequate  in  this  country,  and  yet  the  working  classes 
have  done  their  best  during  fifty  years  to  make  provision  without 
the  aid  of  the  State.  But  it  is  insufficient.  The  old  man  has  to 
bear  his  own  burden,  while  in  the  case  of  a  young  man  who  is 
broken  down  and  who  has  a  wife  and  family  to  maintain,  the  suf- 
fering is  increased  and  multiplied  to  that  extent.  These  problems 
of  the  sick,  of  the  infirm,  of  the  men  who  cannot  find  means  of 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  I43 

earning  a  livelihood,  though  they  seek  it  as  if  they  were  seeking 
for  alms,  who  are  out  of  work  through  no  fault  of  their  own,  and 
who  cannot  even  guess  the  reason  why,  are  problems  with  which 
it  is  the  business  of  the  State  to  deal ;  they  are  problems  which 
the  State  has  neglected  too  long.  In  asking  the  House  to  give  a 
second  reading  to  this  Bill,  we  ask  them  to  sanction  not  merely 
its  principle,  but  also  its  finance,  having  regard  to  the  fact  that  we 
are  anxious  to  utilise  the  resources  of  the  State  to  make  provision 
for  undeserved  poverty  and  destitution  in  all  its  branches. 


Extract  27 

OPPOSITION  TO   OLD   AGE   PENSIONS   BILL 

{Air.  Harold  Cox,  Commons,  June  7j,  igo8) 

Mr.  Cox  ^  moved  an  Amendment  declaring  : 

While  it  is  desirable  that  the  State  should  organise  aid  for  the  unfor- 
tunate by  establishing  and  assisting  a  general  system  of  insurance  against 
the  principal  risks  of  life,  it  is  unjust  to  spend  the  taxpayers'  money  in 
giving  subsidies  to  persons  selected  by  arbitrary  standards  of  age,  income, 
and  character. 

He  said  he  was  not  opposed  on  general  grounds  to  the  organisa- 
tion of  a  system  of  old  age  pensions,  but  he  was  strongly  opposed 
to  the  particular  scheme  which  the  Government  had  put  forward, 
because  he  held  that  the  scheme  was  unjust  in  principle,  and  as 
a  consequence  was  necessarily  unjust  in  almost  every  one  of  its 
details.  That  arose  from  the  fact  that  if  they  started  with  a  false 
principle,  they  were  bound  to  set  up  arbitrary  distinctions  which 
must  act  harshly  upon  particular  individuals  and  give  a  favour  to 
one  man  while  they  refused  the  same  favour  to  another  man  who 
had  an  equal  title  to  it.  Why  should  they  start  by  saying  that 
people  over  the  age  of  seventy  were  entitled  to  a  pension  any 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  190,  col.  596  sqq. 


144  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

more  than  by  saying,  for  instance,  that  all  people  afiflicted  with 
blindness  should  receive  a  pension?  He  would  take  a  more 
striking  case  —  that  of  a  woman  who  was  left  a  widow  with  a 
young  family.  What  did  the  Government  d6  for  her?  All  the 
Government  did  for  her  was  to  tax  the  food  of  her  children  in 
order  that  they  might  have  money  to  give  pensions  to  old  people 
who  were  possibly  much  better  off  than  she  was.  That  was  the 
essence  of  the  scheme.  Taxes  would  be  kept  on  the  necessaries 
of  life  in  order  to  provide  pensions  for  old  people. 

The  whole  idea  of  giving  pensions  instead  of  leaving  people 
to  draw  relief  from  the  Poor  Law  was  that  the  Poor  Law  was 
humiliating.  They  had  heard  that  stated  in  all  the  speeches  in 
favour  of  the  Bill.  What  were  they  going  to  do  for  the  man  over 
sixty  and  under  seventy  ?  Was  he  to  go  on  suffering  humiliation, 
or  was  he  to  starve  ?  There  was  as  much  humiliation  in  receiving 
Poor  Law  relief  at  sixty  as  at  seventy  years  of  age.  The  Chan- 
cellor of  the  Exchequer  in  the  somewhat  extraordinary  speech 
which  he  had  delivered  that  afternoon  seemed  to  be  apologising 
in  almost  every  sentence  for  his  scheme.  In  fixing  the  age  limit 
at  seventy,  the  Government  were  flying  in  the  face  of  experience. 
What  had  the  trade  unions  done  ?  The  Amalgamated  Society  of 
Engineers  provided  pensions  which  were  drawable  at  the  age  of 
fifty-five  in  cases  where  on  account  of  infirmity  or  old  age  a  mem- 
ber was  unable  to  obtain  the  ordinary  wages  of  his  trade.  .  .  . 
The  Prime  Minister,  speaking  a  night  or  two  ago  at  the  National 
Liberal  Club  in  regard  to  the  payment  of  5  s.  to  people  over 
seventy,  said,  "  It  will,  without  any  offence  to  their  self-respect 
or  to  their  proper  pride,  without  any  feeling  of  humiliation,  put 
at  least  half  a  million  of  old  folk,  the  veterans  of  our  industrial 
army,  entirely  beyond  the  reach  of  pecuniary  anxiety  and  care." 
What  kind  of  a  world  did  the  Prime  Minister  live  in  ?  He  won- 
dered whether  his  right  hon.  Friend  had  ever  -tried  to  live  in 
London  on  5s.  a  week,  and  if  he  had  found  himself  entirely 
beyond  the  reach  of  pecuniary  anxiety  and  care.    Why !  he  would 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  145 

not  get  a  single  room  for  less  than  3s.,  and  then  he  would  have 
28.  left  for  food  or  clothing.  There  were  a  great  many  people 
who,  even  if  they  had  the  money,  could  not  take  care  of  them- 
selves. ...  In  particular  there  was  evidence  of  the  effect  of  drink 
on  the  old  age  pension  question.  So  serious  was  that  evil  in 
Australia  that  it  was  recommended  by  the  Royal  Commission 
that  it  should  be  m,ade  a  penal  offence  to  give  or  serve  drink  to 
old  age  pensioners. 

An  Hon.  Member  :  For  giving  one  glass  of  beer  to  an  old  man  ? 

Mr.  Cox  said  there  was  exactly  the  same  difficulty  in  our  own 
country.  He  had  a  letter  from  the  master  of  a  workhouse  near 
London,  where  they  had  a  good  many  Army  pensioners.  ...  He 
might  mention  that  he  had  frequently  called  the  attention  of  the 
Secretary  for  War  to  this  scandal,  but  as  yet  nothing  had  been 
done.  If  old  age  pensions  were  paid  as  a  right,  the  man  might 
claim  to  be  treated  as  other  individuals  in  regard  to  the  right  to 
buy  a  glass  of  beer.  ... 

The  question  he  asked  hon.  Members  opposite  was,  "  Do  you 
propose  to  give  honourable  pensions  to  men  who  dishonour  our 
common  humanity,  and  provide  these  pensions  by  taxing  men 
who  honestly  earn  their  living  ?  "  He  challenged  them  to  go  on 
a  platform  and  say  that  that  was  what  they  meant.  That  was  a 
dilemma  from  which  there  was  no  possibility  of  escape  as  long 
as  they  had  a  non-contributory  system.  They  must  either  give 
honourable  pensions  to  any  number  of  blackguards,  or  have  an 
investigation  of  character  which  would  be  painful  to  all  the  honest 
people.  The  only  escape  from  that  dilemma  was  by  contributory 
pensions.  The  money  then  belonged  of  right  to  the  pensioner, 
and  there  was  no  need  for  an  inquiry  into  character.   .   .   . 

A  phrase  constantly  used  in  this  matter  was  that  old  age  pen- 
sions were  to  be  given  as  a  right,  and  not  as  a  charity,  as  a 
recompense  for  previous  services  to  the  State.  Did  hon.  Members 
below  the  gangway  agree  with  that  ?  [''  Hear,  hear."]  They  did ; 
then  they  would  be  willing  to  accept  some  test  to  prove  that  there 


146  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

had  been  previous  service  to  the  State.  Otherwise  they  would  be 
throwing  dust  in  the  eyes  of  the  public.  He  hoped  he  might  say 
without  offence  that  they  had  already  been  misleading  the  public 
by  confusing  the  difference  between  the  pension  given  to  Lord 
Cromer  and  old  age  pensions  which  they  demanded  for  everybody. 

An  Hon.  Member  :  Why  ? 

Mr.  Cox  said  he  was  sorry  his  hon.  Friend  could  not  see  the 
difference  between  giving  a  pension  to  a  man  like  Lord  Cromer, 
who  had  done  great  service  to  the  State,  and  to  a  man  with 
regard  to  whom  they  would  not  take  the  trouble  to  ascertain 
whether  he  had  done  anything  at  all. 

An  Hon.  Member  :  Lord  Cromer  had  a  big  salary. 

Mr.  Cox  said  that  as  regarded  that  it  sometimes  happened  that 
when  a  trade  union  secretary,  who  had  drawn  what  was  for  him  a 
substantial  salary  and  had  served  his  society  well,  at  the  end  of 
his  time  retired,  he  received  a  handsome  present  from  his  society. 
That  was  exactly  what  the  State  had  done  to  Lord  Cromer.  .  .  . 
[Mr.  Cox  then  sketched  the  German  contributory  scheme  and 
queried  as  to  whence  money  was  coming  for  a  non-contributory 
scheme.] 

Personally  he  lived  by  what  he  earned,  and  he  would  be  ashamed 
if  he  did  not  make  a  fair  contribution  to  the  cost  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  country.  He  was  quite  sure  that  was  the  opinion 
of  most  Englishmen.  He  observed  with  great  pleasure  that  hon. 
Members  below  the  gangway  had  consistently  supported  the  pro- 
posal that  the  income  tax  should  be  extended  downwards  so  that 
every  man,  however  poor,  might  make  some  contribution  in  pro- 
portion to  his  means.  But  while  they  held  that  sound  view  they 
unfortunately  also  held  a  view  that  was  very  alluring,  but  which 
he  thought  was  ultimately  deceptive  —  the  view  that  they  could 
through  the  Budget  redress  the  inequalities  of  fortune.  It  was 
very  alluring.  When  one  saw  the  hideous  inequalities  which  existed 
at  present,  the  horrible  contrast  between  great  riches  and  abject 
poverty,  one  was  greatly  tempted  to  say,  "  We  will  redress  this 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  I47 

injustice  by  means  of  taxation."  If  they  could  do  it  he  would  be 
in  favour  of  doing  it,  but  he  did  not  think  it  could  be  done,  for 
the  proposal  involved  subsidising  the  industries  of  the  country 
which  were  not  paying  a  sufficient  wage  at  present,  and  giving 
money  to  people  not  in  return  for  the  work  they  did  but  because 
they  were  poor.  That  meant  that  they  were  going  to  treat  poverty 
as  a  permanent  institution,  and  the  necessary  consequence  was 
that  they  would  create  a  vast  number  of  dependants.  The  man 
who  earned  his  living  was  independent.  He  could  face  his  master 
as  a  man  because  he  gave  his  work  in  return  for  his  wages.  But 
if  they  were  going  to  give  a  man  something  in  return  for  nothing, 
they  made  him  a  dependant.  He  ceased  to  be  an  independent 
citizen  and  became  a  dependant  on  the  will  of  some  official  or  of 
some  committee  of  elected  persons  consisting  either  of  superior 
persons  with  charitable  inclinations  or  of  inferior  persons  with 
axes  to  grind.  But  whichever  it  was,  he  was  a  dependant,  and 
no  longer  a  free  man  as  he  was  before.  Therefore  he  held  that 
the  true  ideal  to  set  before  them  was  to  raise  wages.  That  was 
the  problem  of  all  problems,  because  on  that  depended  ever}^thing. 
On  that  depended  housing,  the  feeding  of  children,  and  old  age. 

What  he  objected  to  in  all  these  schemes  of  State  charity  was 
that  instead  of  aiming  at  the  abolition  of  poverty  they  tended  to 
perpetuate  poverty  by  treating  it  as  a  permanent  institution.  In 
the  same  way  if  they  were  going  to  argue  that  because  wages 
were  low  in  certain  industries,  those  wages  must  be  supplemented 
at  the  expense  of  the  taxpayer,  it  meant  they  were  going  to  say 
certain  industries  were  parasitic  and  must  be  subsidised  by  the 
taxpayer.  What  would  be  the  result  ?  People  would  begin  to  say, 
"  If  you  are  going  to  have  parasitic  industries  paid  for  by  the 
taxpayer,  why  should  we  not  pay  for  them  in  the  simplest  way, 
by  putting  a  duty  on  foreign  goods  ? "  The  free-trade  objection 
to  a  protectionist  tariff  was  that  it  created  parasitic  industries,  and 
the  good  industries  of  the  country  were  taxed  for  the  benefit  of 
the  bad  industries.   Thus  by  admitting  the  principle  of  a  subsidy  to 


148  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

badly-paid  industries  they  were  giving  away  the  free-trade  case. 
That  was  a  danger  which  he  thought  had  not  been  sufficiently  faced. 
Some  weeks  ago  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  apropos  of 
nothing  in  particular,  had  described  him  as  a  champion  of  lost 
causes.  He  was  not  quite  sure  that  he  knew  what  that  meant. 
For  the  past  eight  or  nine  years  he  had  devoted  the  greater  part 
of  his  life  to  fighting  for  free  trade.  Was  that  a  lost  cause  ?  When 
he  listened  to  the  speeches  of  his  right  hon.  Friend  he  was  some- 
times tempted  to  fear  that  he  thought  so.  Personally  he  did  not 
share  that  opinion.  He  had  too  much  confidence  in  the  ultimate 
common-sense  of  his  countrymen  to  believe  that  there  could  be 
anything  more  than  an  ephemeral  success  for  the  strange  move- 
ment which  had  captured  the  imagination  and  temporarily  im- 
prisoned the  intelligence  of  hon.  Gentlemen  opposite.  Even  were 
it  otherwise,  even  if  he  thought  free  trade  were  indeed  a  lost 
cause,  he  for  one  would  not  cease  fighting  for  it.  For  he  was 
not  ashamed  to  confess  that  the  principles  of  free  trade  were  to 
him  a  living  faith.  In  saying  that  he  was  not  referring  only  to  the 
application  of  those  principles  to  the  business  of  international  buy- 
ing and  selling,  though  that  alone  was  no  little  matter.  It  was  no 
little  matter  that  the  teeming  population  of  these  islands  was  free 
to  draw  its  sustenance  from  every  quarter  of  the  globe.  It  was 
no  little  matter  that  our  manufacturers  and  captains  of  industry 
were  free  to  assemble  here  every  type  of  raw  material  that  the 
world  produced  and  every  kind  of  machine  and  mechanical  device 
that  other  brains  had  invented  or  other  hands  had  fashioned,  and 
thus  aided  were  to  build  up,  here  in  these  litde  islands,  vast  and 
flourishing  industries.  That  alone  was  no  little  matter.  But  there 
was  something  even  more  than  that.  .So  far  as  the  relations  of 
the  citizens  of  a  country  to  one  another  and  to  their  Government 
were  concerned,  the  essential  principle  of  free  trade,  stated  in  its 
simplest  terms,  was  fair  play  all  around  —  the  principle  which 
required  the  State  to  give  equal  consideration  to  all  its  subjects 
and  which  forbade  the  State  to  give  gratuitous  favours  either  to 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  I49 

particular  industries  or  to  particular  individuals.  That  principle 
he  held  to  be  of  priceless  value.  In  all  the  complexities,  in  all 
the  temptations,  of  political  life,  it  would  enable  them  to  steer  a 
straight  course  and  maintain  unblurred  upon  their  banner  the  device 
"  Equal  justice  between  man  and  man."    He  begged  to  move. 

Extract  28 

A  CONSERVATIVE  OPPONENT  TO  THE  GOVERNMENT  BILL 

[Lord  Robert  Cecil,  Contmons,  June  /j,  igo8) 

Lord  Robert  Cecil,^  in  seconding  the  amendment,  said  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  had  referred  to  him  as  an  anarch- 
ist. He  preferred  to  describe  his  form  of  political  belief  as  a 
reasonable  trust  in  personal  freedom  and  personal  liberty.  But 
he  imagined  that  it  was  not  only  in  this  country  that  the  bureau- 
crat had  always  thought  that  he  who  differed  from  him  was  an 
anarchist.  He  presumed  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  was 
really,  if  one  might  attribute  such  a  defect  to  so  eminent  a  person, 
making  a  confusion  between  anarchism  and  individualism.  They 
did  not  appear  to  be  in  every  respect  identical.  In  the  main  ques- 
tion of  principle  that  they  had  to  discuss,  it  was  fair  to  say  that 
those  who  differed  from  the  Government  differed  because  they 
were  of  a  more  individualistic  tendency  than  was  shown  in  the 
immediate  proposals  of  the  Government.  He  did  not  wish  to  at- 
tempt to  define  socialism  and  individualism,  but  there  were  two 
very  distinct  principles  on  which  they  might  proceed  in  approaching 
this  question  of  old  age  pensions.  There  was  the  principle  that  it 
was  primarily  the  duty  of  everybody  to  provide  for  his  own  old  age, 
and  provide  for  himself  generally.  That  was  the  principle  that  he 
himself  held,  and  he  quite  admitted  that  they  were  entitled  to  add 
to  that,  that  where  for  some  reason  or  another  the  individual  was 
unable  to  provide  for  himself,  it  was   reasonable  for  the  State 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  190,  col.  613  sqq. 


I50  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

to  come  in  and  give  assistance  to  that  individual.  That  was  the 
principle. on  which  the  contributory  system  rested.  .  .   . 

They  were  now  in  a  position  to  state  shortly  what  the  real  pro- 
posal of  the  Government  was.  It  was  to  make  an  enormous  gift  of 
money,  originally  stated  to  be  between  _;^6, 000,000  and  ^7,000,000, 
to  a  very  large  section  of  the  working  classes  who  were  possessed 
of  very  large  electoral  power.  In  the  last  Parliament  they  constantly 
heard  it  said,  he  thought  very  unwisely,  by  hon.  Members  opposite 
that  the  Party  to  which  he  had  the  honour  to  belong  was  in  the  habit 
of  giving  doles  to  various  classes.  Why  was  not  that  said  of  this  Bill  ? 

Mr,  John  Ward  :  It  is  following  your  precedent. 

Lord  R.  Cecil  said  that  the  hon.  Member  would  not  find  any 
precedent  for  a  gift  of  ;^6,ooo,ooo  or  ^7,000,000  to  any  particular 
class  of  the  community.  He  did  not  say  that  it  was  necessarily 
wrong  ;  all  he  wished  to  do  was  to  call  the  attention  of  the  House 
to  the  fact  that  this  was  a  definite  gift  of  6,000,000  or  7,000,000 
golden  sovereigns  out  of  the  money  of  the  general  taxpayers  to  a 
particular  class  who  possessed  very  large  electoral  power.  The  only 
reason  why  this  was  not  described  as  a  dole  by  hon.  Members  oppo- 
site was  that  this  particular  class  happened  to  have  a  very  large 
voting  power  in  the  country.  Let  the  House  remember  that  this 
was  only  the  beginning.  He  was  using  the  ordinary  thin  end  of  the 
wedge  argument,  but  he  would  remind  hon.  Members  what  had 
been  said  by  Ministers  in  recommending  this  scheme.  The  Prime 
Minister  had  stated  that  it  was  avowedly  and  professedly  a  tem- 
porary measure  and  that  there  was  no  finality  about  it.  The  scheme 
began  at  ;^6,ooo,ooo  and  it  had  now  risen  to  ^^7, 500, 000,  and  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  had  shown  that  it  might  automatically 
rise,  unless  something  further  was  done,  to  ;^i  1,000,000. 

The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  had  pledged  himself  to  the 
proposition  that  it  was  not  right  for  the  State  to  require  any  con- 
tribution from  those  whom  it  was  intended  to  assist.  It  did  not 
need  any  violent  stretch  of  the  imagination  to  guess  what  would 
happen  the  next  time  the  Government  got  in  some  little  difficulty 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  15I 

in  regard  to  one  of  its  measures  —  it  might  be  the  Licensing  Bill 
or  the  Education  Bill.  They  knew  what  had  happened  at  recent 
bye-elections  and  they  could  easily  imagine  what  would  happen  in 
the  future.  The  Government  would  be  able  to  say  that  5  s.  a  week 
for  people  over  seventy  was  ridiculous  and  it  ought  to  be  extended 
to  people  over  sixty-five  years  of  age,  and  the  pensions  ought  to  be 
IDS.  a  week.  Having  stated  that,  perhaps  the  bye-elections  would 
go  a  little  bit  better  for  the  Government.  He  thought  the  right 
hon.  Gentlemen  might  be  trusted  in  this  matter,  but  any  ordinary 
Government  which  had  this  great  opportunity  for  wholesale  per- 
suasion of  the  electors  at  the  expense  of  the  taxpayer  must  go  on 
extending  gifts  as  long  as  the  finances  of  the  country  permitted  it. 
.  .  .  He  did  not  wish  to  be  an  alarmist,  but  he  felt  that  with  the 
vast  responsibilities  of  this  country  they  had  in  the  last  resort  only 
the  national  character  to  depend  on.  They  had  no  right  to  assume 
that  during  the  next  twenty-five  years  they  would  have  so  peaceful 
a  course  to  steer.  No  one  who  looked  even  from  outside  at  the 
present  international  situation  could  fail  to  see  certain  elements  of 
difficulty  and  danger  in  the  future.  And  if  they  had  to  enter  upon 
a  great  life  and  death  struggle,  as  might  well  happen,  and  they  had 
weakened  the  fibre  of  their  people  by  a  system  and  by  a  policy  of 
which  this  was  only  the  beginning,  then  the  statesmen  in  the  House 
of  Commons  who  had  sanctioned  that  miserable  backsliding  from 
the  true  statesmanship  of  Empire  would  have  much  to  answer  for. 
He  begged  to  second. 

Extract  zg 

SCEPTICISM  ON  OLD  AGE  PENSIONS 

{Mr.  Arthur  J.  Balfour,  Commons,  July  9,  igoS) 

Mr.  Balfour  ^ :  .  .  .  I  think  that  neither  the  actual  provisions 
of  this  Bill  nor  the  mode  in  which  the  Government  have  allowed  it 
to  be  discussed  gives  us  the  smallest  security  that  one  of  the  greatest 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  192,  col.  175  sqq. 


152  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

and  most  costly  experiments  in  social  legislation  is  going  to  be  tried 
under  circumstances  that  will  give  any  hope  of  permanent  success. 
There  are  three  main  questions  raised  by  the  scheme.  The  first  is, 
Will  this  Bill  work  according  to  its  avowed  objects  .'  Is  the  machinery 
of  the  Bill,  in  other  words,  going  to  give  pensions  on  the  plan  that 
the  Government  say  is  desirable  ?  The  second  is.  How  is  it  going 
to  affect  the  broader  and  wider  problems  of  social  reform  ?  And 
the  third  is.  How  is  it  going  to  affect  the  national  finances  ?  These 
are  the  three  problems  that  every  man  in  this  House,  no  matter  in 
which  quarter  he  may  sit,  should  really  consider  if  he  wants  "to 
estimate  the  value  of  the  legislative  experiment  the  Government 
are  now  trying. 

The  first  point  is  whether  the  Bill  is  really  going  to  work  out 
according  to  the  theoiy  of  its  framers  ;  and,  if  it  does,  what  will  be 
its  results  ?  The  theory  of  its  framers  is  a  very  simple  one.  They 
say  that,  pending  the  acquisition  of  further  national  resources,  they 
must  limit  their  Bill  to  pensions  for  persons  seventy  years  of  age, 
and,  to  put  it  broadly,  of  good  character.  How  is  this  Bill  going 
to  attain  these  two  objects .''  How  is  the  machinery  going  to  limit 
the  Bill  to  persons  of  seventy  and  to  persons  of  good  character  ? 
And  will  the  machinery  work  smoothly,  justly,  and  to  public  advan- 
tage ?  I  cannot  really  believe  that  the  Government  have  thoroughly 
thought  out  the  method  in  which  their  own  machiner}'  is  going  to 
work.  Take  the  first  of  the  two  conditions,  that  of  age.  That  is 
one  of  the  subjects  we  have  discussed.  We  have  not  had  an  oppor- 
tunity of  discussing  the  age  as  between  seventy  and  sixty-five,  be- 
cause that  was  shut  out  by  the  closure,  but  we  have  discussed  on 
more  than  one  occasion  the  machinery  by  which  the  age  of  seventy 
is  to  be  arrived  at.  I  do  not  think  that  by  any  statement  the  Gov- 
ernment have  shown  a  clear  idea  of  the  difficulties  by  which  that 
investigation  is  surrounded  or  the  means  by  which  those  difficulties 
are  to  be  surmounted.  In  the  first  place,  who  are  the  investigators  ? 
They  are  officers  of  the  Inland  Revenue,  a  single  committee  for 
each  county  and  large  borough,  and  ultimately  the  President  of  the 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  I  53 

Local  Government  Board.  For  the  life  of  me  I  cannot  see  that  an 
investigation  can  be  carried  out  by  any  of  these  three  bodies.  I 
made  some  remarks  in  Committee  with  regard  to  the  Inland  Rev- 
enue officers  which  1  believe  have  given  pain  to  those  most  esti- 
mable public  officers.  If  I  have  said  anything  that  gave  them  pain 
I  most  heartily  withdraw  it.  They  are  a  most  valuable  body  of  men 
and  carry  out  duties  of  great  responsibility  with  perfect  uprightness 
and  great  efficiency.  But  I  ask  whether  the  most  admirable  per- 
formance of  the  duties  of  the  Inland  Revenue  either  gives  a  man 
the  training  or  provides  him  with  the  machinery  by  which  this  kind 
of  investigation  is  to  be  carried  out.  Take  the  case  of  an  unskilled 
labourer  in  London.  He  reaches  an  age  that  he  himself  thinks  is 
either  seventy  or  very  nearly  so.  He  believes  that  he  has  worked 
hard  all  his  life,  and  that  if  anybody  deserves  a  pension  he  does. 
He  applies  to  the  Inland  Revenue  officer  and  says,  "  My  name 
is  O'Grady." 

Mr.  John  Wilson  :  Make  it  Smith,  and  then  you  are  safe. 

Mr.  Balfour.  I  chose  an  Irish  name  for  a  particular  reason 
which  will  appear  directly.  He  says,  "  My  age  is  seventy,  and  I 
desire  to  be  supplied  with  a  pension.  I  come  from  Cork."  The 
Inland  Revenue  officer  says,  "  What  proof  have  you  that  you  are 
seventy  ?  "  He  has  no  proof.  Why  should  he  have  a  proof  .''  I 'do 
not  believe  I  should  know  my  own  age  if  it  were  not  that  tactless 
friends  are  constantly  reminding  me  of  it.  Most  assuredly  a  dock 
labourer  who  left  Cork  thirty  years  ago  may  very  well  be  excused 
if  he  has  not  proof  of  his  age,  since  he  was  born  in  a  country  where 
there  was  no  registration  of  births  at  the  time  when  he  was  pre- 
sumably born.  How  is  this  unfortunate  official  going  to  investigate 
in  the  City  of  Cork  whether  Mr.  O'Grady  working  at  the  docks  is 
or  is  not  seventy  years  of  age  ?  The  thing  appears  to  be  wholly  im- 
possible, and  there  is  no  machinery  for  doing  it.  The  county  com- 
mittee to  which  he  refers  are  no  better  off  than  himself,  and  if  they 
refer  to  the  head  of  the  Local  Government  Board  he  is  no  better 
off.    The  machinery  cannot  be  found  and  will  not  be  supplied.  .  .  . 


154  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

If  the  diflficulties  with  regard  to  age  are  overwhelming,  what  are 
we  to  say  with  regard  to  the  investigation  as  to  character  ?  None 
of  us  are  without  some  misgivings  as  to  the  enormous  power  given 
to  an  Imperial  officer  and  to  a  local  committee  to  form  a  judgment 
on  the  way  in  which  the  poorer  classes  of  the  community  have 
carried  out  their  life's  duty.  It  is  not  a  pleasant  thing  to  have  to 
do,  and  if  it  is  done  honestly  and  conscientiously  it  will  be  a  very 
painful  duty  thrown  on  those  who  may  have  to  do  it.  Here,  again, 
we  really  have  very  little  means  of  obtaining  assistance.  Do  not  let 
us  consider  the  country  village  where  everyone's  character  is  known. 
There  may  be  an  opportunity  for  favouritism  or  vindictive  attacks  on 
unpopular  persons,  but  the  facts  will  be  known  and  may  be  fairly  and 
properly  judged  upon.  But  how  can  the  facts  be  known  with  regard 
to  the  great  floating  population  of  the  huge  industrial  centres  .-*... 

Will  its  operation  be  confined  to  persons  over  seventy,  and  of 
virtuous  character .''  I  do  not  believe  for  one  moment  that  it  will. 
We  are  very  good-natured  people,  particularly  so  when  we  are 
dealing  with  other  people's  money ;  and  the  duty  of  excluding 
anybody  from  the  benefits  of  the  Act  will  be  a  painful  and  also  an 
expensive  one.  Every  committee  which  declares  a  person  in  its 
district  or  county  or  borough  to  be  ineligible  for  a  pension  has  to 
do  that  which  is  very  painful  from  the  point  of  view  of  humanity, 
and  very  disagreeable  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  local  purse. 
When  humanity  and  economy  are  on  one  side,  I  think  they  are 
too  strong  for  any  legislative  dykes  which  the  Government  may 
raise  against  them,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  the  dykes  that  the 
Government  have  raised  will  keep  out  the  waters  of  expenditure 
for  one  moment.  Hon.  Gentlemen  below  the  gangway  greatly  re- 
gretted that  they  could  not  discuss  their  Amendment  for  reducing 
the  age  from  seventy  to  sixty-five.  I  do  not  think  it  will  make  very 
much  difference.  I  believe  that  under  this  Bill  everybody  who 
desires  a  pension  and  can  show  a  decent  appearance  of  being 
seventy  will  probably  be  found  eligible  by  a  kindly  Imperial  officer 
and  a  charitable  county  committee. 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  I  55 

That  raises  one  or  two  points  of  very  great  importance.  The 
first  point  touches  on  what  I  have  described  as  the  second  great 
question  raised  by  this  Bill  —  namely,  its  future  effect  on  social 
reform.  If  you  are  going  to  use,  as  I  am  sure  you  are  going  to 
use,  this  Bill  as  a  mere  method  of  giving  pensions  at  the  taxpayers' 
expense  to  persons  in  declining  years,  and  who  have  not  got  a  very 
black  mark  against  their  character,  how  will  you  prevent  its  becoming 
a  mere  part  of  the  outdoor  relief  system  of  the  country  ?  You  can- 
not do  it.  It  is  quite  true  that  you  have  got  a  different  machinery 
for  allocating  the  money,  but  to  suppose  that  the  ordinary  citizen 
is  going  nicely  to  distinguish  between  what  he  gets  through  the 
Imperial  officer  and  the  committee  and  what  he  gets  through  the 
relieving  officer  and  the  board  of  guardians,  and  to  regard  one  as 
discreditable  and  the  other  as  creditable,  is  really  trespassing  upon 
our  credulity.  .  .  .  The  truth  is,  the  Government  must  be  perfectly 
well  aware  that  they  ought  to  have  taken  this  question  of  old  age 
pensions  as  part  of  the  general  problem  of  poverty.  You  cannot 
divorce  the  two.  If  only  for  the  purpose  of  distinguishing  pension 
from  Poor  Law  relief  you  must  consider  the  two  together.  .  .  . 

This  really  brings  me  to  the  last  of  the  three  points  I  wished  to 
touch  upon  —  namely,  the  relation  of  this  measure  to  our  national 
finances.  I  confess  that  I  look  on  this  whole  question  with  con- 
siderable alarm.  The  hon.  Member  for  Newcastle-under-Lyme 
[Mr.  Wedgwood]  explained  that  after  all  no  great  burden  would 
be  cast  on  our  national  finances,  because  the  money  was  now  paid 
by  the  charitable  and  through  the  Poor  Law,  and  there  was  not 
much  difference  whether  the  burden  was  thrown  on  the  Exchequer 
by  this  Bill  or  whether  it  was  left  to  be  paid  sporadically  and  uncer- 
tainly, partly  by  Poor  Law  machinery  and  partly  by  the  private 
machinery  of  charity.  I  think  that  the  hon.  Member  is  profoundly 
mistaken.  It  makes  the  whole  difference  where  the  money  comes 
from.  The  mere  fact  that  there  is  money  to  be  got  somewhere 
does  not  make  it  easy  for  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  to  get 
it.  ,  .  ,  The  Government  here  shows  what  the  public  are  to  get, 


156  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

but  they  have  not  yet  been  shown  how  they  are  to  pay  for  it. 
But  there  is  a  divergence  of  opinion  even  among  the  members  of 
the  Government.  The  Prime  Minister  assured  us  more  than  once 
that  the  Government  had  considered  the  point,  and  that  they  clearly 
saw  their  way  to  provide  the  necessary  funds  by  means  of  free- 
trade  finance.  This  method  of  carrying  it  out  is  a  secret  which 
the  Prime  Minister  has  kept  not  only  from  the  Opposition,  but 
from  his  colleague  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  I  think  that 
is  carrying  secrecy  too  far.  I  think  that  in  the  comity  of  the  Cabinet 
the  late  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  should  have  told  the  present 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  how,  within  the  limits  of  free-trade 
finance,  ^6,500,000  are  to  be  found  next  yeat  and  ;i^7,5oo,ooo 
the  year  after.  It  is  not  going  to  be  ^7,500,000  either.  If  my  in- 
terpretation of  the  situation  is  correct,  you  will  get  to  ^i  1,500,000 
almost  immediately,  and  how  within  the  limits  of  free-trade  finance 
are  you  to  get  ;^ii,5oo,ooo?  There  is  no  great  information 
either  to  be  got  from  the  present  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  ac- 
cording to  what  he  has  already  told  the  City,  and  if  he  has  kept 
the  secret  from  the  high  financial  authorities  of  the  City,  it  is  not 
likely  that  he  will  tell  his  critics  in  the  House.  I  do  not  ask  him, 
therefore,  to  tell  us,  if  he  does  not  know.  But  again  I  ask,  Where, 
within  the  limits  of  free-trade  finance,  are  ;;{J"6,5oo,ooo,  ^7,500,000, 
or  ^i  1,500,000  to  be  obtained  ?  .   .  . 

I  regret  the  hasty  course  which  the  Government  have  taken, 
but  the  responsibility  must  lie  with  them.  The  Government  alone 
have  the  opportunity  of  estimating  the  resources  at  their  disposal 
for  carrying  it  out.  They,  and  they  alone,  have  the  machinery  for 
making  some  comparative  survey  of  all  the  needs  of  the  State.  On 
them  lies  the  responsibility.  The  Bill  does  not  satisfy  the  demands 
of  those  who  claim  the  right  to  old  age  pensions,  and  on  the  other 
hand  it  so  burdens  and  cripples  the  national  resources  that  we  may 
find  it  impossible  to  meet  other  obligations  not  less  pressing,  not 
less  connected  with  the  safety  of  the  State  and  the  well-being  of 
the  poorer  members  of  the  State. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  I  57 

Extract  jo 

LABOUR   DEFENCE  OF  OLD   AGE  PENSIONS 

{Mr.  William  Crooks,  Coi/iiiwiis,  July  p,  jgo8) 

Mr.  Crooks  ^ :  I  apologise  to  the  House  for  intervening  in  the 
debate  at  this  late  hour.  What  astonished  me  in  the  course  of 
the  discussion  is  the  different  grounds  hon.  Gentlemen  above  the 
gangway  have  taken.  First  they  wanted  a  proper  universal  scheme  ; 
then  they  wanted  certain  qualifications  put  in  ;  then  the  mover  of 
the  Amendment  to-day  deplored  that  there  were  so  many  quali- 
fications in  order  that  a  poor  man  might  get  a  certificate  of  char- 
acter before  he  could  secure  a  pension.  Now  they  regret  the  failure 
of  their  efforts  to  put  in  still  more  qualifications. 

I  have  read  somewhere  that  life  is  a  comedy  to  a  thinking  man 
and  a  tragedy  to  a  feeling  man.  That  is  all  the  difference  in  the 
world.  We  have  had  an  exhibition  of  thinking  without  feeling. 
I  have  felt  pretty  keenly  about  the  whole  business  —  listening  to 
the  flippancy  which  one  expects  at  some  kind  of  Tory  meeting. 
In  a  pamphlet  which  I  wrote  ten  years  ago  I  anticipated  that 
whenever  a  scheme  of  old  age  pensions  was  considered  in  the 
House  of  Commons  it  would  be  called  "  a  glorified  outdoor  relief." 
So  is  every  kind  of  pension  that  is  paid  out  of  the  taxpayers' 
pockets.  We  have  been  told  by  opponents  of  the  Bill  about  inquisi- 
torial examinations  of  claimants  for  a  pension.  It  is  very  good  of 
these  hon.  Gentlemen,  1  admit  it.  Is  it  not  the  case  that  hon.  and 
right  hon.  Gentlemen  who  receive  pensions  from  His  Majesty's 
Government  are  obliged  to  declare  in  writing  their  impecuniosity  ? 
How  dreadfully  lowering  and  degrading  it  must  be  to  a  man  whose 
private  income  would  be  wealth  beyond  the  dreams  of  avarice  to 
an  ordinary  poor  man  in  this  country  !  Yet,  he  has  the  nerve  to 
write  to  somebody  and  to  declare  his  impecuniosity  before  he  gets 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  192,  col.  195  sqq. 


158  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

his  ;^ 1 200  a  year!  No  man  reads  him  a  little  homily  on  thrift. 
No  man  says  a  word  about  it.  There  is  nothing  degrading^  about 
pensions  at  all,  except  when  they  get  down  to  5s.  a  week;  they 
are  not  awfully  degrading,  but  the  reward  for  services  to  the  State 
—  that  is,  if  they  are  anything  between  ^1200  and  ^4000  a  year. 
They  then  add  to  the  dignity  and  importance  of  His  Majesty's 
subjects.   .  .   . 

There  is  a  Poor  Law  Commission  sitting  now,  and  that  would 
be  a  reason  for  doing  nothing,  because  when  the  late  Govern- 
ment wished  to  do  nothing,  they  appointed  a  Royal  Commission. 
I  have  illustrated  the  fact,  I  think,  before.  It  is  the  case  of  the 
man  who  once  saw  a  lot  of  coloured  cooked  eggs  on  a  barrow, 
and  he  said,  "  What  are  those  eggs,  guv'nor .? "  "  Oh,  they  are 
partridge  eggs."  "  Do  you  think  a  hen  would  bring  them  off  ? " 
"  Yes,  I  should  think  so."  "  Then  how  much  for  a  sitting  ?  "  "  is. 
6d.  and  a  share  of  your  luck."  About  four  weeks  after  he  turned 
up  again  and  gazed  wistfully  at  the  stall,  and  the  man  recognised 
him  and  said  :  "  Well,  what  luck  ?  "  "  Oh,  you  never  saw  anything 
like  it  in  your  life.  The  hen,  she  sat  and  sat,  and  I  am  blowed  if 
she  did  not  cook  them."  There  has  never  been  an  Old  Age  Pen- 
sion Commission  or  a  Poor  Law  Commission  which  did  not  well 
cook  their  reports  before  bringing  them  to  this  House.  The  regu- 
lations of  the  Board  have  amended  Poor  Law  relief  out  of  all 
knowledge.  They  told  us  to  give  outdoor  relief  generously,  and 
in  giving  it  to  old  and  deserving  people  we  should  not  rake  up  the 
past.  I  was  a  guardian  and  I  wished  to  do  it  generously.  Some 
said,  "  They  do  not  want  old  age  pensions ;  you  want  to  make  the 
workhouse  more  comfortable."  Well,  we  did  that,  and  what  was 
the  result  ?    I  was  put  on  trial  and  very  nearly  got  time.   .   .   . 

I  once  said,  and  I  repeat,  that  no  man  should  sit  in  this  House 
without  having  served  first  for  ten  years  as  a  Poor  Law  guardian. 
He  would  then  know  something  about  human  nature.  It  is  not 
perfect.  There  are  a  good  many  sides  to  it,  but  most  people 
who  apply  for  relief  are  very  human,  and  I  do  not  think  they  very 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  I  59 

much  object  to  these  inquisitorial  examinations  as  to  their  character. 
We  were  challenged  by  the  hon.  Member  for  Preston  [Mr.  Harold 
Cox],  who  said,  "  Would  you  go  on  any  public  platform  and  declare 
that  you  are  in  favour  of  giving  a  pension  of  5  s.  per  week  to  a 
drunken,  thriftless,  worthless  man  or  woman .-'  "  My  reply  is  very 
prompt  to  that.  A  man  of  seventy  with  nothing  in  the  world  to 
help  him  is  going  to  cut  a  pretty  shine  on  5  s.  per  week,  whether 
his  character  be  good  or  bad.  What  could  he  do  with  it  ?  It  is  not 
enough  to  keep  him  in  decency,  and  he  would  be  well  punished 
for  not  taking  care  when  he  had  the  opportunity  if  he  had  to  live 
on  5s.  per  week.  Who  are  you,  to  be  continually  finding  fault? 
Who  amongst  you  has  such  a  clear  record  as  to  be  able  to  point 
to  the  iniquity  and  wickedness  of  an  old  man  of  seventy  ?  I  said 
before,  and  I  repeat,  if  a  man  is  foolish  enough  to  get  old,  and  if 
he  has  not  been  artful  enough  to  get  rich,  you  have  no  right  to 
punish  him  for  it.  It  is  no  business  of  yours.  It  is  sufficient  for 
you  to  know  he  has  grown  old. 

After  all,  who  are  these  old  men  and  women  .-'  Let  me  appeal  to 
the  noble  Lord  the  Member  for  Marylebone  [Lord  Robert  Cecil]. 
They  are  the  veterans  of  industry,  people  of  almost  endless  toil, 
who  have  fought  for  and  won  the  industrial  and  commercial 
supremacy  of  Great  Britain.  Is  their  lot  and  end  to  be  the  Bas- 
tille of  the  everlasting  slur  of  pauperism  ?  We  claim  these  pensions 
as  a  right.  Ruskin,  I  think,  read  you  a  little  homily  on  the  sub- 
ject—  "Even  a  labourer  serves  his  country  with  his  spade  and 
shovel  as  the  statesman  does  with  his  pen,  or  the  soldier  with 
his  sword."  He  has  a  right  to  some  consideration  from  the  State. 
Here  in  a  country  rich  beyond  description  there  are  people  poverty- 
stricken  beyond  description.  There  can  be  no  earthly  excuse  for 
the  condition  of  things  which  exists  in  this  country  to-day.  If  it  be 
necessary  to  have  a  strong  Army  and  Navy  to  protect  the  wealth 
of  the  nation,  do  not  let  us  forget  that  it  is  the  veterans  of  industry 
who  have  created  that  wealth ;  and  let  us  accept  this  as  an  instal- 
ment to  bring  decency  and  comfort  to  our  aged  men  and  women, 


l6o  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  ji 

OPPOSITION  TO  THE  BILL  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  LORDS 

[Ear/  of  IVe/nyss,  Lords^  Jn/y  20,  igo8) 

The  Earl  of  Wemyss/  who  had  given  notice  of  an  Amendment— 

That  pending  the  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  now  inquiring  into 
the  principles  and  working  of  the  existing  Poor  Law  it  would  be  unwise  to 
enter  upon  the  consideration  of  a  Bill  establishing  the  far-reaching  prin- 
ciple of  State  Old  Age  Pensions  — 

said  :  .  .  .  Last  Thursday  the  Times,  in  a  leading  article,  recom- 
mended your  Lordships  to  pass  the  second  and  even  the  third 
reading  of  the  Bill,  not  on  account  of  any  merit  it  has,  but  for 
your  own  sake,  and  for  the  good  of  your  Lordships'  House.  In 
the  same  article,  however,  there  was  a  sentence  which  blew  all  this 
to  smitliereens,  and  I  commend  it  to  the  notice  of  your  Lordships' 
House.  The  sentence  ran  —  "  But  the  real  objection  to  the  Bill  is 
that  it  is  fundamentally  on  wrong  lines,  and  is,  in  fact,  not  a  pen- 
sion but  a  Bill  giving  indefinite  extension  of  outdoor  relief." 

It  is  on  that  ground  that  I  venture  to  ask  your  Lordships 
whether  it  is  wise  to  go  on  with  the  Bill.  I  want  your  Lordships 
to  consider,  supposing  this  to  be  right,  what  indefinite  extension 
of  outdoor  relief  means. 

I  should  like  to  take  your  Lordships  back  seventy  years.  In 
1834  the  Poor  Law,  which  had  existed  from  the  time  of  Elizabeth, 
had,  by  mismanagement  and  lax  administration,  produced  such  a 
state  of  things  that  it  was  given  in  evidence  before  the  Poor  Law 
Commission  of  that  date  that  labourers  said,  "  Damn  work  !  Blast 
work!  Why  should  I  work  when  I  can  get  los.  from  the  rates 
for  doing  nothing." 

The  Commission,  on  which  the  Bishop  of  London  and  the  Bishop 
of  Carlisle  sat,  reported  that  all  this  was  due  to  lax  administration, 

Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  192,00!.  1335  sqq. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  l6l 

and  that  stringency  in  administering  the  law  was  necessary.  There 
may  be  people  who  say  that  the  law  has  been  too  stringent  and  too 
harsh,  but  those  two  Bishops  evidently  did  not  think  so.  What  has 
happened  since  then .'  From  that  time  better  administration  has 
prevailed,  outdoor  relief  has  been  restricted,  and  the  independence 
of  the  people  has  been  restored.  If,  from  sentimental  motives, 
Parliament  passes  this  Bill,  I  hold  that  you  will  establish  a  system 
of  demoralisation  amongst  the  working  classes,  that  you  will  do 
away  with  thrift,  that  families  will  cease  to  regard  it  as  an  obliga- 
tion to  maintain  those  of  their  members  whose  working  days  are 
passed,  and  that  self-reliance  will  be  diminished. 

I  see  in  his  place  my  noble  friend  Lord  Rosebery.  He,  as 
Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Glasgow,  delivered  the  other  day 
a  most  admirable  speech,  in  the  course  of  which  he  spoke  strongly 
of  the  need  of  self-reliance.  What  he  said  is  so  much  to  the  point 
that  I  will,  with  your  Lordships'  permission,  read  it.  The  noble 
Earl  said  :  "  The  State  invites  us  every  day  to  lean  upon  it.  I  seem 
to  hear  the  wheedling  and  alluring  whisper,  '  Sound  you  may  be, 
we  bid  you  be  a  cripple.  Do  you  see  ?  Be  blind.  Do  you  hear  ? 
Be  deaf.  Do  you  walk  ?  Be  not  so  venturesome.  Here  is  a  crutch 
for  one  arm  ;  when  you  get  accustomed  to  it,  you  will  soon  want 
another  — -  the  sooner  the  better.'  The  strongest  man  if  encouraged 
may  soon  accustom  himself  to  the  methods  of  an  invalid ;  he  may 
train  himself  to  totter,  or  to  be  fed  with  a  spoon.  .  .  .  Every 
day  the  area  for  initiative  is  being  narrowed,  every  day  the  stand- 
ing ground  for  self-reliance  is  being  undermined ;  every  day  the 
public  infringes  —  with  the  best  intentions,  no  doubt  —  on  the  indi- 
vidual ;  the  nation  is  being  taken  into  custody  by  the  State."  And 
at  the  end  the  noble  Earl  said,  "  It  was  self-reliance  that  built  the 
Empire  ;  it  is  by  self-reliance,  and  all  that  that  implies,  that  it  must 
be  welded  and  continued.''  Those  are  wise  words,  which  I  humbly 
recommend  to  the  attention  of  your  Lordships.  .   .  . 

I  could,  if  I  wished  to  detain  your  Lordships,  give  you  unlimited 
quotations  against  this  Bill.    All  those  who  have  given  their  lives 


l62  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

to  the  care  of  the  poor  and  are  interested  in  thrift  and  other  socie- 
ties are  all  hostile  to  the  Bill,  as  it  at  present  stands.  I  will  not 
quote  those  authorities,  but  will  be  satisfied  by  reading  to  your 
Lordships  an  extract  from  a  circular  issued  by  the  Charity  Organ- 
isation Society,  of  which  many  of  your  Lordships  are  members, 
and  which  has  done  excellent  work  during  the  last  thirty  years. 
That  society  has  issued  a  circular  against  the  Bill  in  which  they 
assert  that  —  "  Neither  the  Bill,  nor  anything  like  the  Bill,  has  ever 
been  demanded  by,  or  received  the  sanction  of,  the  electors.  To 
delay  the  passing  of  the  Bill  can  do  no  serious  injury  to  the  coun- 
try and  will  enable  the  nation  to  consider  calmly  the  policy  of  a 
measure  which,  for  good  or  bad,  produces  a  social  revolution." 
That  is  an  accurate  description  of  the  Bill,  and  I  think  it  would  be 
wise  if  your  Lordships  were  to  postpone  consideration  of  it  until 
all  possible  information  is  obtained.  For  what  are  you  doing  ?  You 
will  be  tying  a  millstone  round  the  neck  of  the  country  and  involving 
it  in  an  expenditure  in  the  end  of  nearly  ^30,000,000  a  year. 

On  the  very  day  last  week  when  this  Bill  passed  through  the 
other  House  there  was  in  France  a  Commission  of  the  Senate  sit- 
ting considering  a  Pension  Bill,  and  that  Commission,  in  spite  of 
the  wish  of  the  French  Government  that  the  Bill  should  proceed 
and  that  they  should  report  upon  it,  declined  to  do  so  until  all  the 
information  that  could  possibly  be  obtained  was  before  them.  My 
Lords,  we  are  told,  Jujs  est  ah  hoste  doceri,  but  I  venture  to  suggest 
that  your  Lordships  might  also  learn  from  a  friend.  I  should  like 
to  see  the  e7itente  cordiale  of  Shepherd's  Bush  carried  to  your  Lord- 
ships' House ;  and  that  you  should  act  as  wisely,  as  moderately, 
and  as  reasonably  as  the  French  Commission  are  doing.  Let  me 
further  remind  your  Lordships  of  that  splendid  French  maxim 
Fais  ce  que  doit  advienne  que  pourra^  and  urge  your  Lordships  to 
act  upon  it.  I  have  nothing  more  to  add.  I  intend  to  stick  to  my 
guns  and  to  divide  your  Lordships  if  I  can  get  a  teller,  and  I  have 
secured  one.  What  success  we  shall  have  in  the  division  lobbies  I 
do  not  know,  but,  at  any  rate,  whatever  the  result  may  be,  one 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  163 

thing  is  certain  —  that  all  the  common-sense  and  the  sense  of  what 
is  right  and  reasonable  in  dealing  with  such  a  question  as  this 
will  be  found  with  the  minority.  I  beg  to  move  the  Amendment 
standing  in  my  name.^ 

Extract  J2 

DANGER  OF  DISPUTE  WITH  THE  HOUSE  OF   COMMONS 

{Earl  of  Rosebety,  Lords,  July  20,  igo8) 

The  Earl  of  Rosebery  ^ :  .  .  .  1  believe  this  is  the  most 
important  Bill  by  a  long  way  that  has  ever  been  submitted  to 
the  House  of  Lords  during  the  forty  years  that  I  have  sat  in  it. 
I  view  its  consequences  as  so  great,  so  mystic,  so  incalculable,  so 
largely  affecting  the  whole  scope  and  fabric  of  our  Empire  itself, 
that  I  rank  it  as  a  measure  far  more  vitally  important  than  even 
the  great  Reform  Bills  which  have  come  before  this  House.  I  con- 
fess, to  come  at  once  to  the  Amendment  of  my  noble  friend,  whom 
we  heard  with  so  much  pleasure  in  such  vigour  at  an  age  so  greatly 
surpassing  the  ordinary  span  of  man,  that,  if  you  take  that  Amend- 
ment in  pure  logic,  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  say  anything  against 
it.  My  noble  friend  says  that  you  should  wait  for  the  Report  of 
the  Poor  Law  Commission  before  coming  to  a  decision  upon  this 
Bill.  His  Majesty's  Government  have  been  a  little  unfortunate, 
owing  to  their  enthusiasm  for  legislation,  in  more  than  once  being 
unable  to  await  pending  inquiries  before  they  proceeded  to  carry 
legislation  into  effect ;  and  I  do  not  know  that  on  any  occasion 
they  have,  been  so  unfortunate  as  they  have  been  with  regard  to 
this  Bill.  .  .  .  But  when  I  come  to  the  practical  bearings  of  my 
noble  friend's  Amendment  I  feel  much  greater  doubts,  and  I  must 
tell  him  at  once  that  I  shall  not  be  able  to  accompany  him  and  his 
teller  into  the  lobby  which  they  have  projected  for  themselves.    I 

i  The  Amendment  of  Earl  Wemysswas  eventually  rejected  by  a  vote  of  123  to  16. 
2  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  192,  col.  1379  sqq. 


l64  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

cannot  do  so  for  very  clear  and  obvious  reasons.  The  first  is  that 
the  Bill  is  an  almost  purely  financial  measure,  coming  up  from  the 
House  of  Commons  with  the  almost  unanimous  support  of  that 
House  after  a  division  which,  I  think,  only  mustered  ten  against  it 
in  its  final  stage,  and  which  had  no  division  against  it  at  all  on  its 
second  reading.  [Viscount  St.  Aldwyn  here  whispered  to  the  noble 
Earl.]  I  am  wrong,  but  at  any  rate  an  almost  equally  insignificant 
division  on  the  second  reading. 

A  financial  Bill  coming  up  with  this  practical  unanimity  from  the 
House  of  Commons  it  may  be  within  your  legal  prerogative  to 
reject,  but  I  am  quite  sure  it  is  equally  impolitic  for  you  to  do  so. 
More  than  this,  it  comes  with  the  assent  of  both  political  parties. 
No  one  can  forget  —  we  have  been  more  than  once  reminded  of 
it  to-night  —  that  the  question  was  started  by  Mr.  Chamberlain 
somewhere  about  1894  or  1895,  and  therefore  if  you  sit  on  the 
cross  benches  and  you  are  not  pledged  to  either  party  in  this 
matter,  you  must  feel,  quite  impartially,  that  this  proposal  comes 
as  a  principle  equal  to  both  parties.   .  .  . 

The  first  responsibility  of  every  country  and  every  nation  is 
national  defence.  I  confess  this  prospect  fills  me  with  despair.  I 
understand  that  the  Government  already  acknowledge  some  lia- 
bility in  respect  of  an  increase  in  the  Navy  for  next  year ;  and  I 
strongly  suspect  that,  in  spite  of  the  somewhat  ambiguous  pro- 
ceedings of  which  we  have  read,  they  do  not  expect  any  material 
reduction  in  the  Army.  Surely  the  moment  is  ill-chosen  for  under- 
taking this  vague  experiment,  so  prodigal  of  expenditure,  and  I 
would  ask  the  Government  —  I  say  it  in  no  spirit  of  hostility,  but  in 
a  spirit  of  earnest  and  deep  anxiety  —  to  meet  some  of  the  points 
raised  in  this  debate,  and  to  assure  us  that,  in  furthering  and  not 
opposing  this  boon  which  they  offer  to  the  old  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  we  are  not  dealing  a  blow  at  the  Empire  which  may  be 
almost  mortal,  and  that  we  are  not  embarrassing  and  encumbering 
our  finances  to  a  degree  of  which  no  man  now  living,  however 
young  he  may  be^  will  see  the  limit  or  the  end. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  165 

Extract  jj 

AN  ANGLICAN  BISHOP  ON  OLD  AGE  PENSIONS 
[Bishop  of  Ripo/i,  Lords,  July  20,  igoS) 

The  Lord  Bishop  of  Ripon  ^ :  .  .  .  My  Lords,  there  is  some- 
thing in  nations  which  is  of  more  importance  to  them  than  mere 
financial  prosperity.  The  accumulation  of  the  power  of  wealth 
which  enables  nations  to  raise  a  considerable  revenue  through 
taxation,  gives  the  stamp,  as  it  were,  of  prosperity,  but  the  best 
asset  of  a  nation  is  a  manly,  vigorous,  and  numerous  race,  and  the 
best  asset  of  the  race  is  that  the  character  of  its  men  and  women 
shall  never  be  impaired.  A  Frenchman  once  wrote  a  book  con- 
cerning what  he  called  the  superiority  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  race, 
and  in  the  course  of  that  book  he  pointed  out  what  he  believed  to 
be  the  one  essential  factor  which  contributed  to  that  superiority. 
He  said  that  in  all  the  history  of  English  life  one  spirit  had  pre- 
vailed, and  that  was  the  spirit  of  self-reliance.  He  turned  to  his 
countrymen  and  said,  "  The  danger  which  we  are  in  to-day  is  that 
we  are  not  rearing  our  population  to  self-reliant  habits."  He  drew 
the  picture  of  the  little  farmer  in  Normandy  who  would  stint  him- 
self and  live  in  an  unclean  and  even  unwholesome  dwelling  in  order 
that  he  might  leave  a  sufficient  sum  to  his  children.  He  pointed 
then  to  the  English  farmer  who,  he  said,  so  far  from  crippling 
himself  in  order  that  his  sons  may  be  well  started  in  the  world, 
takes  the  strong  and  independent  line  and  says,  "  I  made  my  way 
in  the  world  and  I  expect  my  sons  to  do  the  same."  "In  other 
words,"  said  the  French  writer,  "  the  race  across  the  Channel  has 
educated  its  children  in  the  habits  of  self-reliance,  and  to  this  habit 
is  largely  due  the  superiority  and  the  strength  of  that  race." 

Now  I  cannot  help  asking  myself,  and  I  feel  sure  that  is  the 
thought   which   has  been   passing  through  many  minds   to-night, 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  192,  col.  13S9  sqq. 


l66  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

whether  we  are  not  in  danger,  not  now,  not  to-day,  but  in  the 
future,  of  dealing  with  this  question  of  financial  support  in  such 
a  way  that  we  undermine  that  spirit  of  self-reliance  out  of  which 
the  strength  and  the  power  of  the  British  race  has  largely  grown. 
That  seems  to  me  to  be  by  far  the  most  important  question  in- 
volved. It  is  character  which  makes,  as  it  were,  for  the  generous 
strength  of  a  race,  and  it  is  character  alone  which  can  give  them 
the  security  for  true  and  abiding  riches.  Therefore  it  is  that  I 
cannot  help  asking  myself  whether  there  may  not  be  a  danger  of 
its  being  weakened  in  the  future. 

I  speak  not  of  those  of  seventy  years  of  age  who  are  to  receive 
the  benefit  of  this  measure.  Their  characters  are  formed,  their 
conditions  are  settled.  We  are  going  forward  to-night  and  saying  : 
"  Let  us  help  them,  let  us  give  to  them  something  which  will  ease 
their  later  years,  and  if  a  few  have  not  deserved,  well,  we  will  at 
any  rate  with  large-heartedness  forget  those  who  were  weak  and 
deal  largely  and  generously  with  this  matter  before  us,  for  all 
these  men  or  women  of  seventy  naturally  appeal  to  the  pity  and 
sympathy  of  our  hearts."  But  when  I  look  beyond  and  ask  whether 
it  is  conceivable  that  we  may  begin  so  to  hold  out  the  thought  that 
men  may  be  able  to  receive  from  the  State  that  which  in  olden  days 
they  won  by  their  own  strong  labours,  self-denial,  and  thrift,  then 
I  am  apprehensive  lest  we  should,  in  attempting  to  do  a  good,  do 
a  great  and  grievous  wrong,  robbing  ourselves  and  our  children  of 
that  which  is  the  best  inheritance,  the  inheritance  of  a  sturdy,  strong, 
self-reliant  manhood,  that  will  take  upon  itself  the  responsibilities 
of  life  and  be  equal,  therefore,  to  the  responsibilities  of  Empire.  I 
think  none  of  us  can  shut  our  eyes  to  the  fact  that  there  are  among 
us  people  who  are  very  ready  to  shirk  responsibility,  and  I,  for  one, 
would  feel  that  the  whole  system  and  condition  of  English  life  had 
lost  its  meaning  and  value  if  once  we  should  act  in  such  a  fashion 
as  to  remove  responsibility,  and  the  sense  of  responsibility,  from 
the  people  of  this  country.  We  are  in  this  world  for  responsibility  ; 
through  responsibility  we  grow  and  rise  to  the  height  of  character 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  167 

which  Divine  Providence  intended  us  to  reach.  Let  us  not,  by  any 
action  of  ours,  weaken  that  which  is  the  best  thing  we  can  preserve, 
the  character  of  the  population,  for  out  of  that,  and  out  of  that 
alone,  will  spring  the  strength  and  the  stability  of  the  nation. 


Extract  j^ 

OLD  AGE   PENSIONS   ACT,   1908 

{8  Edw.  7,  ch.  40) 

An  Act  to  provide  for  Old  Age  Pensions.       (ist  August  1908) 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 

I.  Right  to  receive  Old  Age  Pension 

(i)  Every  person  in  whose  case  the  conditions  laid  down  by  this 
Act  for  the  receipt  of  an  old  age  pension  (in  this  Act  referred  to 
as  statutory  conditions)  are  fulfilled,  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  such 
a  pension  under  this  Act  so  long  as  those  conditions  continue  to 
be  fulfilled,  and  so  long  as  he  is  not  disqualified  under  this  Act  for 
the  receipt  of  the  pension. 

(2)  An  old  age  pension  under  this  Act  shall  be  at  the  rate  set 
forth  in  the  schedule  to  this  Act. 

(3)  The  sums  required  for  the  payment  of  old  age  pensions 
under  this  Act  shall  be  paid  out  of  moneys  provided  by  Parliament. 

(4)  The  receipt  of  an  old  age  pension  under  this  Act  shall  not 
deprive  the  pensioner  of  any  franchise,  right,  or  privilege,  or  sub- 
ject him  to  any  disability. 


l68  .     BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

2.  Statutory  Conditions  for  Receipt  of  Old  Age  Pension 

The  statutory  conditions  for  the  receipt  of  an  old  age  pension 
by  any  person  are  — 

(i)  The  person  must  have  attained  the  age  of  seventy : 

(2)  The  person  must  satisfy  the  pension  authorities  that  for  at 

least  twenty  years  up  to  the  date  of  the  receipt  of  any 
sum  on  account  of  a  pension  he  has  been  a  British  sub- 
ject, [and  has  had  his  residence,  as  defined  by  regulations 
under  this  Act,  in  the  United  Kingdom]  ^ : 

(3)  The  person  must  satisfy  the  pension  authorities  that  his 

yearly  means  as  calculated  under  this  Act  do  not  exceed 
thirty-one  pounds  ten  shillings. 

J.   Disqualif cation  for  Old  Age  Pension^ 

(i)  A  person  shall  be  disqualified  for  receiving  or  continuing 
to  receive  an  old  age  pension  under  this  Act,  notwithstanding  the 
fulfilment  of  the  statutory  conditions  — 

{a)  While  he  is  in  receipt  of  any  poor  relief  (other  than  relief 
excepted  under  this  provision),  and,  until  the  thirty-first 
day  of  December  nineteen  hundred  and  ten  unless  Parlia- 
ment otherwise  determines,  if  he  has  at  any  time  since 
the  first  day  of  January  nineteen  hundred  and  eight  re- 
ceived, or  hereafter  receives,  any  such  relief :  Provided 
that  for  the  purposes  of  this  provision  — 

(i)  any  medical  or  surgical  assistance  (including  food  or 
comforts)  supplied  by  or  on  the  recommendation 
of  a  medical  officer  ;  or 
(ii)  any  relief  given  to  any  person  by  means  of  the 
maintenance  of  any  dependant  of  that  person 
in  any  lunatic  asylum,  infirmar}^,  or  hospital,  or 
the  payment  of  any  expenses  of  the  burial  of  a 
dependant ;  or 

1  Repealed  by  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  191 1.    Cf.  infra,  p.  178. 

2  Cf.  amendments  in  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  191 1.    Cf.  infra,  p.  179. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  169 

(iii)  any  relief  (other  than  medical  or  surgical  assist- 
ance,   or    relief    herein-before    specifically    ex- 
empted)   which    by    law    is    expressly   declared 
not  to  be  a  disqualification  for  registration  as 
a  parliamentary  elector,  or  a  reason  for  depriv- 
ing   any    person    of    any    franchise,    right,    or 
privilege ; 
shall  not  be  considered  as  poor  relief : 
(b)  If,  before  he  becomes  entitled  to  a  pension,  he  has  habitually 
failed  to  work  according  to  his  ability,  opportunity,  and 
need,  for  the  maintenance  or  benefit  of  himself  and  those 
legally  dependent  upon  him ; 

.  Provided  that  a  person  shall  not  be  disqualified  under 
this  paragraph  if  he  has  continuously  for  ten  years  up  to 
attaining  the  age  of  sixty,  by  means  of  payments   to 
friendly,  provident,  or  other  societies,  or  trade  unions, 
or  other  approved  steps,  made  such  provision  against  old 
age,  sickness,  infirmity,  or  want  or  loss  of  employment 
as  may  be  recognised  as  proper  provision  for  the  purpose 
by  regulations  under  this  Act,  and  any  such  provision, 
when  made  by  the  husband  in  the  case  of  a  married 
couple  living  together,  shall  as  respects  any  right  of  the 
wife  to  a  pension,  be  treated  as  provision  made  by  the 
wife  as  well  as  by  the  husband : 
((')  While  he  is  detained  in  any  asylum  within  the  meaning  of 
the  Lunacy  Act,  1890,  or  while  he  is  being  maintained  in 
any  place  as  a  pauper  or  criminal  lunatic : 
{(I)  During  the  continuance  of  any  period  of  disqualification 
arising  or  imposed  in  pursuance  of  this  section  in  conse- 
quence of  conviction  for  an  offence. 
(2)  Where  a  person  has  been  before  the  passing  of  this  Act, 
or  is  after  the  passing  of  this  Act,  convicted  of  any  offence,  and 
ordered  to  be  imprisoned  without  the  option  of  a  fine  or  to  suffer 
any  greater  punishment,  he  shall  be  disqualified  for  receiving  or 


I/O  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

continuing  to  receive  an  old  age  pension  under  this  Act  while  he 
is  detained  in  prison  in  consequence  of  the  order,  and  for  a  further 
period  of  ten-"^  years  after  the  date  on  which  he  is  released  from 
prison. 

(3)  Where  a  person  of  sixty  years  of  age  or  upwards  having 
been  convicted  before  any  court  is  liable  to  have  a  detention  order 
made  against  him  under  the  Inebriates  Act,  1898,  and  is  not  nec- 
essarily, by  virtue  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  disqualified  for  re- 
ceiving or  continuing  to  receive  an  old  age  pension  under  this  Act, 
the  court  may,  if  they  think  fit,  order  that  the  person  convicted  be 
so  disqualified  for  such  period,  not  exceeding  ten  years,  as  the 
court  direct. 

4.    Calculation  of  Means  ^ 

(3)  If  it  appears  that  any  person  has  directly  or  indirectly  de- 
prived himself  of  any  income  or  property  in  order  to  qualify  him- 
self for  the  receipt  of  an  old  age  pension,  or  for  the  receipt  of  an 
old  age  pension  at  a  higher  rate  than  that  to  which  he  would  other- 
wise be  entitled  under  this  Act,  that  income  or  the  yearly  value  of 
that  property  shall,  for  the  purposes  of  this  section,  be  taken  to  be 
part  of  the  means  of  that  person. 

jr.  Mode  of  paying  Pensions 

(i)  An  old  age  pension  under  this  Act,  subject  to  any  directions 
of  the  Treasury  in  special  cases,  shall  be  paid  weekly  in  advance 
in  such  manner  and  subject  to  such  conditions  as  to  identification 
or  otherwise  as  the  Treasury  direct. 

(2)  A  pension  shall  commence  to  accrue  on  the  first  Friday  after 
the  claim  for  the  pension  .has  been  allowed,  or,  in  the  case  of  a 
claim  provisionally  allowed,  on  the  first  Friday  after  the  day  on 
which  the  claimant  becomes  entitled  to  receive  the  pension. 

1  Amended  in  191 1  to  read  "two." 

2  Subsections  (i)  and  (2)  of  section  4  were  repealed  by  the  Act  of  1911.  For  the 
substitutions,  of,  infra,  p.  177. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  I/I 

6.    Old  Age  Pension  to  be  Inalienable 

Every  assignment  of  or  charge  on  and  every  agreement  to  assign 
or  charge  an  old  age  pension  under  this  Act  shall  be  void,  and,  on 
the  bankruptcy  of  a  person  entitled  to  an  old  age  pension,  the  pen- 
sion shall  not  pass  to  any  trustee  or  other  person  acting  on  behalf 
of  the  creditors. 

1-  Determination  of  Claims  and  Questions 

(i)  All  claims  for  old  age  pensions  under  this  Act  and  all  ques- 
tions whether  the  statutory  conditions  are  fulfilled  in  the  case  of 
any  person  claiming  such  a  pension,  or  whether  those  conditions 
continue  to  be  fulfilled  in  the  case  of  a  person  in  receipt  of  such 
a  pension,  or  whether  a  person  is  disqualified  for  receiving  or  con- 
tinuing to  receive  a  pension,  shall  be  considered  and  determined  ^ 
as  follows : 

(a)  Any  such  claim  or  question  shall  stand  referred  to  the  local 
pension  committee,  and  the  committee  shall  (except  in  the 
case  of  a  question  which  has  been  originated  by  the  pen- 
sion officer  and  on  which  the  committee  have  already  re- 
ceived his  report),  before  considering  the  claim  or  question, 
refer  it  for  report  and  inquiry  to  the  pension  officer : 
{!))  The  pension  officer  shall  inquire  into  and  report  upon  any 
claim  or  question  so  referred  to  him,  and  the  local  pen- 
sion committee  shall,  on  the  receipt  of  the  report  of  the 
pension  officer  and  after  obtaining  from  him  or  from  any 
other  source  if  necessary  any  further  information  as  to 
the  claim  or  question,  consider  the  case  and  give  their 
decision  upon  the  claim  or  question : 
{/)  The  pension  officer,  and  any  person  aggrieved,  may  appeal 
to  the  central  pension  authority  against  a  decision  of  the 
local  pension  committee  allowing  or  refusing  a  claim  for 

1  The  character  of  such  questions  is  defined  in  the  Old  Age  Tensions  Act,  igii, 
section  6.   Cf.  infra,  p.  iSo. 


172  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

pension  or  determining  any  question  referred  to  them 
within  the  time  and  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  regula- 
tions under  this  Act,  and  any  claim  or  question  in  respect 
of  which  an  appeal  is  so  brought  shall  stand  referred  to 
the  central  pension  authority,  and  shall  be  considered  and 
determined  by  them  : 
(d)  If  any  person  ^  is  aggrieved  by  the  refusal  or  neglect  of  a 
local  pension  committee  to  consider  a  claim  for  a  pension, 
or  to  determine  any  question  referred  to  them,  that  person 
may  apply  in  the  prescribed  manner  to  the  central  pension 
authority,  and  that  authority  may,  if  they  consider  that 
the  local  pension  committee  have  refused  or  neglected 
to  consider  and  determine  the  claim  or  question  within  a 
reasonable  time,  themselves  consider  and  determine  the 
claim  or  question  in  the  same  manner  as  on  an  appeal 
from  the  decision  of  the  local  pension  committee : 
(2)   The  decision  of  the  local  pension  committee  on  any  claim 
or  question  which  is  not  referred  to  the  central  pension  authority, 
and  the  decision  of  the  central  pension  authority  on  any  claim  or 
question  which  is  so  referred  to  them,  shall  be  final  and  conclusive. 

8.  Administrative  Machijiery 

(i)  The  local  pension  committee  shall  be  a  committee  appointed 
for  every  borough  and  urban  district,  having  a  population  according 
to  the  last  published  census  for  the  time  being  of  twenty  thousand 
or  over,  and  for  every  county  (excluding  the  area  of  any  such  bor- 
ough or  district)  by  the  council  of  the  borough,  district,  or  county. 

The  persons  appointed  to  be  members  of  a  local  pension  com- 
mittee need  not  be  members  of  the  council  by  which  they  are 
appointed. 

(2)  A  local  pension  committee  may  appoint  such  and  so  many 
sub-committees,  consisting  either  wholly  or  partly  of  the  members 
of  the  committee  as  the  committee  think  fit,  and  a  local  pension 

1  Cf.  Act  of  1911,  section  6,  subsection  (6),  infra,  p.  1S2. 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  173 

committee  may  delegate,  either  absolutely  or  under  such  conditions 
as  they  think  fit,  to  any  such  sub-committee  any  powers  and  duties 
of  the  local  committee  under  this  Act. 

(3)  The  central  pension  authority  shall  be  the  Local  Govern- 
ment Board,  and  the  Board  may  act  through  such  committee,  per- 
sons, or  person  appointed  by  them  as  they  think  fit. 

(4)  Pension  officers  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Treasury,  and 
the  Treasury  may  appoint  such  number  of  those  officers  as  they 
think  fit  to  act  for  such  areas  as  they  direct. 

(5)  Any  reference  in  this  Act  to  pension  authorities  shall  be 
construed  as  a  reference  to  the  pension  officer,  the  local  pension 
committee,  and  the  central  pension  authority,  or  to  any  one  of 
them,  as  the  case  requires.  » 

g.  Penalty  for  False  Statements  ^ 

(i)  If  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  or  continuing  an  old  age 
pension  under  this  Act,  either  for  himself  or  for  any  other  person, 
or  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  or  continuing  an  old  age  pension 
under  this  Act  for  himself  or  for  any  other  person  at  a  higher  rate 
than  that  appropriate  to  the  case,  any  person  knowingly  makes 
any  false  statement  or  false  representation,  he  shall  be  liable  on 
summary  conviction  to  imprisonment  for  a  term  not  exceeding  six 
months,  with  hard  labour. 

(2)  If  it  is  found  at  any  time  that  a  person  has  been  in  receipt 
of  an  old  age  pension  under  this  Act  while  the  statutory  conditions 
were  not  fulfilled  in  his  case  or  while  he  was  disqualified  for  receiv- 
ing the  pension,  he  or,  in  the  case  of  his  death,  his  personal  repre- 
sentative, shall  be  liable  to  repay  to  the  Treasury  any  sums  paid  to 
him  in  respect  of  the  pension  while  the  statutory  conditions  were 
not  fulfilled  or  while  he  was  disqualified  for  receiving  the  pension, 
and  the  amount  of  those  sums  may  be  recovered  as  a  debt  due  to 
the  Crown. 

1  Important  amendments  of  this  section  in  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  191 1, 
sections  6  and  7.    Cf.  infra,  pp.  180-1S3. 


174  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

10.  Regulatmis  and  Expenses 

(i)  The  Treasury  in  conjunction  with  the  Local  Government 
Board  and  with  the  Postmaster-General  (so  far  as  relates  to  the 
Post  Office)  may  make  regulations  for  carrying  this  Act  into 
effect,  and  in  particular  — 

(a)  for  prescribing  the  evidence  to  be  required  as  to  the  fulfil- 
ment of  statutory  conditions  [and  for  defining  the  mean- 
ing of  residence  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act]  -^ ;  and 
{U)  for  prescribing  the  manner  in  which  claims  to  pensions  may 
be  made,  and  the  procedure  to  be  followed  on  the  consid- 
eration and  determination  of  claims  and  questions  to  be 
considered  and  determined  by  pension  officers  and  local 
pension  committees  or  by  the  central  pension  authority, 
and  the  mode  in  which  any  question  may  be  raised  as  to 
the  continuance,  in  the  case  of  a  pensioner,  of  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  statutory  conditions,  and  as  to  the  disqualifi- 
cation of  a  pensioner  ;  and 
{c)  as  to  the  number,  quorum,  term  of  office,  and  proceed- 
ings generally  of  the  local  pension  committee  and  the 
use   by    the    committee,   with   or   without   payment,   of 
any  offices  of  a  local  authority,  and  the  provision  to  be 
made  for  the  immediate  payment  of  any  expenses  of 
the  committee  which  are  ultimately  to  be  paid  by  the 
Treasury. 
(2)  The  regulations   shall  provide  for  enabling  claimants  for 
pensions  to  make  their  claims  and  obtain  information  as  respects 
old  age  pensions  under  this  Act  through  the  Post  Office,  and  for 
provisionally  allowing  claims  to  pensions  before  the  date  on  which 
the  claimant  will  become  actually  entitled  to  the  pension,  and  for 
notice  being  given  by  registrars  of  births  and  deaths  to  the  pen- 
sion officers  or  local  pension  committees  of  every  death  of  a  person 
over  seventy  registered  by  them,  in  such  manner  and  subject  to 

1  Repealed  by  the  Act  of  191 1. 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  1/5 

such  conditions  as  may  be  laid  down  by  the  regulations,  and  for 
making  the  procedure  for  considering  and  determining  on  any 
claim  for  a  pension  or  question  with  respect  to  an  old  age  pension 
under  this  Act  as  simple  as  possible. 

(3)  Every  regulation  under  this  Act  shall  be  laid  before  each 
House  of  Parliament  forthwith,  and,  if  an  address  is  presented  to 
His  Majesty  by  either  House  of  Parliament  within  the  next  subse- 
quent twenty-one  days  on  which  that  House  has  sat  next  after  any 
such  regulation  is  laid  before  it,  praying  that  the  regulation  may 
be  annulled,  His  Majesty  in  Council  may  annul  the  regulation,  and 
it  shall  thenceforth  be  void,  but  without  prejudice  to  the  validity 
of  anything  previously  done  thereunder. 

(4)  Any  expenses  incurred  by  the  Treasury  in  carrying  this  Act 
into  effect,  and  the  expenses  of  the  Local  Government  Board  and 
the  local  pension  committees  under  this  Act  up  to  an  amount  ap- 
proved by  the  Treasury,  shall  be  defrayed  out  of  moneys  provided 
by  Parliament. 

II.  Application  to  Scotland,  Ireland,  and  the  Scilly  Isles 

(i)  In  the  application  of  this  Act  to  Scotland,  the  expression 
"  Local  Government  Board  "  means  the  Local  Government  Board 
for  Scotland ;  the  expression  "  borough "  means  royal  or  parlia- 
mentary burgh ;  the  expression  "  urban  district "  means  police 
burgh ;  the  population  limit  for  boroughs  and  urban  districts  shall 
not  apply;  and  the  expression  "Lunacy  Act,  1890,"  means  the 
Lunacy  (Scotland)  Acts,  1857  to  1900. 

(2)  In  the  application  of  this  Act  to  Ireland,  the  expression 
"  Local  Government  Board  "  means  the  Local  Government  Board 
for  Ireland  ;  ten  thousand  shall  be  substituted  for  twenty  thousand 
as  the  population  limit  for  boroughs  and  urban  districts ;  and  the 
expression  "  asylum  within  the  meaning  of  the  Lunacy  Act,  1890," 
means  a  lunatic  asylum  within  the  meaning  of  the  Local  Govern- 
ment (Ireland)  Act,  1898. 


176 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


(3)  In  the  application  of  this  Act  to  the  Isles  of  Scilly,  those 
isles  shall  be  deemed  to  be  a  county  and  the  council  of  those  isles 
the  council  of  a  county.    . 

12.    Comineiwemc/it  a /id  Title 

( 1 )  A  person  shall  not  be  entitled  to  the  receipt  of  an  old  age  pen- 
sion under  this  Act  until  the  first  day  of  January  nineteen  hundred 
and  nine  and  no  such  pension  shall  begin  to  accrue  until  that  day. 

(2)  This  Act  may  be  cited  as  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  1908. 

Schedule 


Means  of  Pensioner 


Rate  of  Pension 
PER  Week 


Where  the  yearly  means  of  the  pensioner  as  calcu 
lated  under  this  Act  — 

Do  not  exceed  £21 

Exceed  £21,  but  do  not  exceed  £23  12s.  6d. 
Exceed  £23  12s.  6d.,  but  do  not  exceed  £26  5s 
Exceed  £26  5s.,  but  do  not  exceed  £28  17s.  6d 
Exceed  £28  17s.  6d.,  but  do  not  exceed  .£31  ids 
Exceed  £31  los 


No  pension 


Extract  J5 

OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  ACT,  1911 

{I  &^  2  Geo.  J,  ch.  16) 

An  Act  to  amend  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  1908. 

(iSth  August  191 1) 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  177 

I.  Calculation  of  Date  of  attaining  Specif  ed  Age 

For  the  purposes  of  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  1908  (in  this 
Act  referred  to  as  "  the  principal  Act"),  a  person  shall  be  deemed, 
according  to  the  law  in  Scotland  as  well  as  according  to  the  law  in 
England  and  Ireland,  to  have  attained  the  age  of  seventy  or  sixty 
on  the  commencement  of  the  day  previous  to  the  seventieth  or  six- 
tieth anniversary,  as  the  case  may  be,  of  the  day  of  his  birth. 

2.  Calculation  of  Means 

(i)  In  calculating,  for  the  purpose  of  the  principal  Act,  the 
means  of  a  person,  account  shall  be  taken  of  — 

(a)  the  yearly  value  of  any  property  belonging  to  that  person 
(not  being  property  personally  used  or  enjoyed  by  him) 
which  is  invested,  or  is  otherwise  put  to  profitable  use  by 
him,  or  which,  though  capable  of  investment  or  profitable 
use,  is  not  so  invested  or  put  to  profitable  use  by  him, 
the  yearly  value  of  that  property  being  taken  to  be  one- 
twentieth  part  of  the  capital  value  thereof ; 

(p)  the  income  which  that  person  may  reasonably  expect  to  re- 
ceive during  the  succeeding  year  in  cash,  excluding  any 
sums  receivable  on  account  of  an  old  age  pension  under 
this  Act,  and  excluding  any  sums  arising  from  the  invest- 
ment or  profitable  use  of  property  (not  being  property 
personally  used  or  enjoyed  by  him),  that  income,  in  the 
absence  of  other  means  for  ascertaining  the  income,  being 
taken  to  be  the  income  actually  received  during  the  pre- 
ceding year ; 

(c)  the  yearly  value  of  any  advantage  accruing  to  that  person 
from  the  use  or  enjoyment  of  any  property  belonging  to 
him  which  is  personally  used  or  enjoyed  by  him,  except 
furniture  and  personal  effects  in  a  case  where  the  total 
value  of  the  furniture  and  effects  does  not  exceed  fifty 
pounds ;  and 


178  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(il)  the  yearly  value  of  any  benefit  or  privilege  enjoyed  by  that 
person : 

Provided  that,  where  under  paragraph  (a)  of  the  foregoing  pro- 
visions the  yearly  value  of  any  property  is  taken  to  be  one-twentieth 
part  of  the  capital  value  thereof,  no  account  shall  be  taken  under 
any  other  of  those  provisions  of  any  appropriation  of  that  property 
for  the  purpose  of  current  expenditure. 

(2)  In  calculating  the  means  of  a  person  being  one  of  a  married 
couple  living  together  in  the  same  house,  the  means  shall  be  taken 
to  be  half  the  total  means  of  the  couple. 

(3)  The  foregoing  provisions  of  this  section  shall  be  substituted 
for  subsections  (i)  and  (2)  of  section  four  of  the  principal  Act. 

J.  ProvisioJis  as  to  JVationalify  and  Reside?ice 

Notwithstanding  anything  in  the  principal  Act  — 

(i)  the  condition  as  to  nationality  imposed  by  paragraph  (2) 
of  section  two  of  the  principal  Act  shall  not  be  required 
to  be  fulfilled  in  the  case  of  a  woman  who  satisfies  the 
pension  authorities  that  she  would,  but  for  her  marriage 
with  an  alien,  have  fulfilled  the  condition,  and  that,  at 
the  date  of  the  receipt  of  any  sum  on  account  of  a  pen- 
sion, the  alien  is  dead,  or  the  marriage  with  the  alien 
has  been  dissolved  or  annulled,  or  she  has,  for  a  period 
of  not  less  than  two  years  up  to  the  said  date,  been 
legally  separated  from,  or  deserted  by,  the  alien : 
(2)  it  shall  be  a  statutory  condition  for  the  receipt  of  an  old 
age  pension  by  any  person,  that  the  person  must  satisfy 
the  pension  authorities  that  for  at  least  twelve  years  in 
the  aggregate  out  of  the  twenty  years  up  to  the  date  of 
the  receipt  of  any  sum  on  account  of  a  pension  he  has 
had  his  residence  in  the  United  Kingdom  : 

Provided  that  for  the  purposes  of  computing  the 
twelve  years'  residence  in  the  United  Kingdom  under 
this  provision  — 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  179 

(a)  any  periods  spent  abroad  in  any  service  under 

the  Crown,  the  remuneration  for  which  is  paid 
out  of  moneys  provided  by  Parliament,  or  as 
the  wife  or  servant  of  a  person  in  any  such 
service  so  remunerated  ;  and 

(b)  any  periods  spent  in  the  Channel  Islands  or  the 

Isle  of  Man  by  a  person  born  in  the  United 
Kingdom ;  and 
(r)  any  periods  spent  abroad  by  any  person  during 
which  that  person  has  maintained  or  assisted 
in  maintaining  any  dependant  in  the  United 
Kingdom  ;  and 
(d)  any  periods  of  absence  spent  in  service  on  board 
a  vessel  registered  in  the  United  Kingdom  by 
a  person  who  before  his  absence  on  that  serv- 
ice was  living  in  the  United  Kingdom  ;  and 
(e)  any  periods  of  temporary  absence  not  exceeding 
three  months  in  duration  at  any  one  time ; 
shall  be  counted  as  periods  of  residence  in  the  United 
Kingdom. 

4.  Amendments  of  Section  j  of  Principal  Act 

(i)  Any  rule  of  law  and  any  enactment,  the  effect  of  which  is 
to  cause  relief  given  to  or  in  respect  of  a  wife  or  relative  to  be 
treated  as  relief  given  to  the  person  liable  to  maintain  the  wife  or 
relative,  shall  not  have  effect  for  the  purposes  of  section  three  of  the 
principal  Act  (which  relates  to  disqualification). 

(2)  Two  years  shall  be  substituted  for  ten  years  as  the  further 
period  of  disqualification  under  subsection  (2)  of  section  three  of 
the  principal  Act,  both  as  respects  persons  convicted  before  the 
passing  of  this  Act,  and,  as  respects  persons  convicted  after  the 
passing  of  this  Act,  in  cases  where  the  term  for  which  a  person  has 
been  ordered  to  be  imprisoned  without  the  option  of  a  fine  does 
not  exceed  six  weeks. 


l8o  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(3)  Any  person  in  receipt  of  an  old  age  pension  who  is  convicted 
of  any  offence  which  is  mentioned  in-or  deemed  to  be  mentioned 
or  included  in  the  First  Schedule  to  the  Inebriates  Act,  1898,  shall, 
if  not  subject  to  disqualification  under  the  principal  Act,  be  disqual- 
ified for  receiving  or  continuing  to  receive  an  old  age  pension  for 
a  period  of  six  months  after  the  date  of  his  conviction,  unless  the 
court  before  whom  he  is  convicted  direct  to  the  contrary. 

J".  Limitatioiis  with  Respect  to  the  Paynient  of  Old  Age  PensioJis 

A  sum  shall  not  be  paid  on  account  of  an  old  age  pension  — ■ 
(a)  to  any  person  while  absent  from  the  United  Kingdom  ;  or 
{b)  if  payment  of  the  sum  is  not  obtained  within  three  months 
after  the  date  on  which  it  has  become  payable. 

6.  Af7ie?idmefits  with  Respect  to  Questiotis  as  to  Old  Age  Perisions 

(i)  It  is  hereby  declared  that  a  question  may  be  raised  at  any 
time  — 

{a)  whether  at  any  time  or  during  any  period  a  person  has  been 
in  receipt  of  an  old  age  pension  when  the  statutory  con- 
ditions were  not  fulfilled,  or  when  he  was  disqualified  for 
receiving  the  pension  ;  and 
{Jy)  whether  a  person  has  been  at  any  time  or  during  any  period 
in  receipt  of  a  pension  at  a  certain  rate  when  his  means 
exceeded  the  amount  which  justified  the  payment  of  a 
pension  at  that  rate,  and,  if  so,  at  what  rate  the  pension, 
if  any,  should  have  been  paid ;  and 
{c)  whether  a  person  who  is  in  receipt  of  a  pension  at  a  certain 
rate  is,  having  regard  to  his  means,  entitled  to  a  pension 
at  a  higher  or  a  lower  rate,  and,  if  so,  at  what  rate  the 
pension  (if  any)  should  be  paid  ; 
and  that  an  application  may  be  made  at  any  time  to  alter  or  revoke 
a  provisional  allowance  of  a  claim  for  a  pension. 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  l8l 

(2)  Section  seven  of  the  principal  Act  shall  apply  to  any  such 
question  or  application  as  it  applies  to  the  questions  mentioned  in 
that  section. 

(3)  Any  such  question  may  be  raised  notwithstanding  that  the 
decision  of  the  question  involves  a  decision  as  to  the  correctness 
of  a  former  decision  of  the  local  pension  committee  or  central  pen- 
sion authority  as  the  case  may  be,  but,  where  by  a  later  decision  a 
former  decision  is  reversed,  a  person  who  has  received  any  sums 
on  account  of  an  old  age  pension  in  accordance  with  the  former 
decision  shall,  notwithstanding  anything  in  subsection  (2)  of  section 
nine  of  the  principal  Act,  in  the  absence  of  any  fraud  on  his  part, 
be  entitled  to  retain  any  sum  so  received  up  to  the  date  of  the  later 
decision  which  he  would  have  been  entitled  to  retain  but  for  the 
reversal  of  the  former  decision. 

(4)  Where  a  question  is  raised  as  to  the  disqualification  of  a 
person  to  receive  an  old  age  pension  and  it  is  alleged  that  the 
disqualification  has  arisen  since  the  person  has  been  in  receipt  of 
the  pension,  and  that  the  disqualification  is  continuing  at  the  time 
the  question  is  raised,  or,  if  it  has  ceased,  has  ceased  less  than 
three  weeks  before  that  time,  the  payment  of  the  pension  shall  be 
discontinued,  and  no  sum  shall  be  paid  to  the  pensioner  on  account 
of  the  pension  after  the  date  on  which  the  question  is  raised : 
Provided  that,  if  the  question  is  decided  in  favour  of  the  pensioner, 
he  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  all  sums  which  would  have  been 
payable  to  him  if  the  question  had  not  been  raised. 

(5)  If  the  decision  on  any  question  involves  the  discontinuance 
of  an  old  age  pension,  or  the  reduction  of  the  rate  at  which  the 
pension  is  paid,  or  if,  in  a  case  where  the  payment  of  the  pension 
has  been  discontinued  on  the  raising  of  the  question,  the  question 
is  not  decided  in  favour  of  the  pensioner,  the  person  in  respect  of 
whose  pension  the  decision  is  given  shall  not  be  entitled  to  receive 
a  pension  or  to  receive  a  pension  at  a  rate  higher  than  that  deter- 
mined by  the  committee  or  authority,  as  the  case  may  be,  notwith- 
standing any  change  of  circumstances,  unless  he  makes  a  fresh 


l82  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

claim  for  the  purpose  and  the  claim  is  allowed,  or,  in  a  case  where 
he  alleges  that  he  is  entitled  to  receive  a  pension  at  a  higher  rate, 
raises  a  question  for  the  purpose  and  the  pension  is  allowed  at  a 
higher  rate. 

(6)  It  is  hereby  declared  that  a  pension  officer,  if  dissatisfied 
with  any  refusal  or  neglect  of  a  local  pension  committee  to  con- 
sider a  claim  or  determine  a  question,  has,  under  paragraph  (<•/)  of 
subsection  (i)  of  section  seven  of  the  principal  Act,  a  right  to 
apply  to  the  central  pension  authority  as  a  person  aggrieved  within 
the  meaning  of  that  provision. 

7.  Amendments  of  Section  g  of  the  Principal  Act 

(i)  Subsection  (2)  of  secdon  nine  of  the  principal  Act  shall 
apply,  with  the  necessary  modifications,  to  cases  where  an  old  age 
pension  is  received  at  a  higher  rate  than  that  appropriate  to  the 
case  as  it  applies  to  cases  where  a  person  has  been  in  receipt 
of  an  old  age  pension  while  the  statutory  conditions  were  not 
fulfilled. 

(2)  For  the  purposes  of  subsection  (2)  of  section  nine  of  the 
principal  Act  and  this  section,  any  decision  of  the  local  pension 
committee  under  section  seven  of  the  principal  Act  on  any  question 
which  is  not  referred  to  the  central  pension  authority  and  the  de- 
cision of  the  central  pension  authority  on  any  question  which  is 
referred  to  them  under  that  section  shall  be  conclusive  proof  of 
any  matters  decided  by  the  committee  or  the  authority. 

A  copy  of  any  decision  of  the  local  pension  committee  or  central 
pension  authority,  if  authenticated  in  manner  provided  by  regula- 
tions to  be  made  for  the  purpose  under  section  ten  of  the  principal 
Act,  shall  be  received  in  evidence. 

(3)  Where  any  person  who  is  in  receipt  of  an  old  age  pension 
is  liable  to  repay  to  the  Treasury  any  sums  under  subsection  (2) 
of  section  nine  of  the  principal  Act  in  consequence  of  the  finding 
of  a  local  pension  committee,  or  of  the  central  pension  authority 


OLD  AGE   PENSIONS  183 

in  the  case  of  a  question  referred  to  them,  the  Treasury  shall  be 
entitled,  without  prejudice  to  their  powers  under  that  subsection, 
to  direct  the  deduction  of  those  sums  from  any  sums  to  which 
that  person  becomes  entitled  on  account  of  an  old  age  pension,  in 
manner  to  be  provided  by  regulations  to  be  made  for  the  purpose 
under  section  ten  of  the  principal  Act : 

Provided  that,  in  the  case  of  a  personal  representative,  the  de- 
duction shall  only  be  made  from  any  sums  to  which  that  person 
becomes  entitled  as  a  personal  representative. 

(4)  A  court  of  summary  jurisdiction  in  Ireland  shall  have  the 
same  power  as  a  court  of  summary  jurisdiction  in  England,  in  the 
case  of  a  person  convicted  for  an  offence  under  subsection  (i) 
of  section  nine  of  the  principal  Act,  to  impose  a  fine  not  exceeding 
twenty-five  pounds  instead  of  imprisonment,  if  they  think  that 
the  justice  of  the  case  would  be  better  met  by  a  fine  than  by 
imprisonment. 

8.  Saving  for  Existing  Pensioners 

The  provisions  of  this  Act  modifying  the  statutory  conditions 
for  the  receipt  of  an  old  age  pension  shall  not  operate  — 

iii)  so  as  to  disentitle  any  person  who  is  in  receipt  of  such  a 

pension  at  the  time  of  the  commencement  of  this  Act 

to  continue  to  receive  his  pension ;  or 
{l))  so  as  to  reduce  the  rate  of  pension  to  which  such  a  person 

is  entitled. 

g.   Title  atid  Commenceme?it 

(i)  The  enactments  mentioned  in  the  schedule  to  this  Act  are 
hereby  repealed  to  the  extent  specified  in  the  third  column  of  that 
schedule. 

(2)  Any  reference  in  this  Act  to  the  principal  Act  or  any  enact- 
ment therein  shall,  unless  the  context  otherwise  requires,  be  con- 
strued as  references  to  that  Act  or  enactment  as  amended  by 
this  Act. 


1 84 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


(3)  This  Act  shall  be  read  as  one  with  the  principal  Act,  and 
may  be  cited  as  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  191 1  ;  and  this  Act 
and  the  principal  Act  may  be  cited  together  as  the  Old  Age  Pen- 
sions Acts,  1908  and  191 1. 

Schedule 
Enactments  Repealed 


Session  and  Chapter 


Short  Title 


Extent  of  Repeal 


8  Edw.  7,  ch.  40 


The  Old  Age  Pen- 
sions Act,  1908 


In  paragraph  (2)  of  section  two 
the  words  "  and  has  had  his 
residence  as  defined  by  regu- 
lations under  this  Act  in  the 
United  Kingdom";  subsec- 
tions (i)  and  (2)  of  section 
four ;  and  the  words  "  and  for 
defining  the  meaning  of  resi- 
dence for  the  purposes  of  this 
Act "  in  paragraph  (a)  of  sub- 
section (i)  of  section  ten 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  UNEMPLOYED 

[On  February  17,  1909,  a  formidable  series  of  subjects  for 
social  legislation  was  supplied  by  the  publication  of  the  Report  of 
a  Poor  Law  Commission  which  had  been  appointed  in  December, 
1905,  with  Lord  George  Hamilton  as  chairman.  The  Commission 
contained  a  number  of  high  authorities  on  the  subjects  with  which 
it  dealt,  including  various  Poor  Law  officials,  Mr.  C.  S.  Loch  of  the 
Charity  Organisation  Society,  Professor  Smart  of  Glasgow,  and 
three  well-known  women  —  Miss  Octavia  Hill,  Mrs.  Bosanquet, 
and  Mrs.  Sidney  Webb.  It  held  over  200  meetings,  heard  1300 
witnesses,  sent  out  special  investigators,  and  visited  many  unions 
and  institutions  in  the  three  kingdoms ;  and  its  evidence  and  other 
material  filled  forty  volumes.  The  Report  volume  was  the  largest 
ever  issued  by  a  British  Royal  Commission ;  and  the  mere  sum- 
mary of  its  contents  occupied  three  pages  of  the  London  Times. 
The  very  brief  synopsis  that  appeared  in  the  "Annual  Register"  is 
given  below  (^Extract  j6). 

On  May  19,  1909,  Mr.  Pickersgill,  a  Liberal  Member  of  Par- 
liament, called  attention  to  the  Minority  Report  of  the  Poor  Law 
Commission  and  moved  a  resolution  declaring  the  urgency  of 
"  steps  for  the  decasualisation  of  casual  labour  and  for  the  ab- 
sorption of  the  surplus  labour  thereby  thrown  out  of  employment ; 
also  to  regularise  the  demand  for  labour,  to  develop  trade  union 
insurance  against  the  risks  of  unemployment,  and  to  establish 
training  colonies  and  detention  colonies."  The  motion  was  seconded 
by  Mr.  Percy  Alden  and  supported  by  Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald, 
the  Labour  leader. 

185 


l86  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Then  Mr.  Winston  Churchill,  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade, 
took  the  opportunity  to  set  forth  a  Government  scheme  of  labour 
exchanges  and  unemployment  insurance  {Extract  jf).  The  scheme 
was  welcomed  as  of  far-reaching  importance  by  Mr.  F.  E.  Smith 
on  behalf  of  the  Opposition  {Extract  j8),  and  by  Mr.  Arthur 
Henderson  on  behalf  of  the  Labour  party  {Extract  jg).  Mr. 
Pickersgill's  motion  was  withdrawn,  and  the  Labour  Exchanges 
Bill  was  introduced  the  next  day  by  Mr.  Churchill,  the  insurance 
plan  being  deferred  until  another  session. 

The  second  reading  of  the  Labour  Exchanges  Bill  on  June  i6, 
1909,  gave  rise  to  an  interesting  debate.  Sir  F.  Banbury,  Unionist 
member  for  London,  doubted  the  utility  of  the  exchanges  and 
argued  that  the  loans  to  unemployed  men  to  enable  them  to  take 
work  at  a  distance  would  lead  merely  to  idle  travelling.  Mr.  Pointer, 
a  new  Labour  member,  referred  to  the  successful  working  of  the 
system  in  Berlin,  urged  that  the  age  of  leaving  school  should  be 
raised  and  scientific  and  technical  instruction  given,  and  declared 
that  working  overtime  robbed  unemployed  men  of  work.  He 
suggested  that  employers  should  contribute  towards  the  travelling 
expenses  of  men  who  found  employment  through  the  exchanges. 
Mr.  Chiozza  Money,  the  Liberal,  urged  that  the  railways  should 
carry  such  men  at  a  reduced  rate.  Mr.  Renwick,  Unionist  member 
from  Newcastle-on-Tyne,  condemned  the  Bill,  declaring  that  it 
would  degrade  labour,  and  the  exchanges  would  be  a  sort  of  hiring 
fair.  Mr.  Roberts,  a  Labourite  from  Norwich,  warned  the  House 
that  while  the  Bill  would  assist  the  organisation  of  labour,  un- 
employment would  continue  until  collective  superseded  individual 
ownership.  Mr.  Bonar  Law,  the  prominent  Unionist,  while  approv- 
ing the  Bill  in  principle,  thought  there  was  too  much  centralisation, 
and  the  measure  was  too  much  of  a  blank  cheque  —  the  Govern- 
ment were  introducing  their  Bill  first  and  preparing  their  plan 
afterwards ;  if  eloquent  speeches  alone  would  cure  unemployment, 
the  Government  would  do  it ;  otherwise  they  must  wait  for  some 
other  Government. 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  18/ 

Second  reading  was  agreed  to  on  June  1 6  and  third  reading  on 
July  29.  The  progress  of  the  Bill  through  the  House  of  Lords 
(July  30-August  5)  was  uneventful;  and  the  royal  assent  was 
registered  on  September  20.  The  Labour  Exchange  Act,  1909,  is 
inserted  as  Extract  40. 

For  the  provisions  of  the  Natural  Insurance  Act  of  191 1  affect- 
ing unemployment,  see  infra,  Chapter  X.] 

Extract  j6 

REPORT  OF  POOR  LAW  COMMISSION,  1909 
{Resinne  from  the  ^'^ Annual  Register^'') 

The  Report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commission,^  published  on 
February  17,  1909,  contained  a  majority  and  a  minority  report. 
The  former,  signed  with  some  reservations  by  fourteen  of  the 
eighteen  Commissioners,  was  largely  statistical  and  historical,  deal- 
ing with  the  history  of  Poor  Law  administration  before  and  since 
1835,  the  causes  of  and  remedies  for  unemployment,  and  the 
reorganisation  of  charity;  and  it  made  239  recommendations  as 
to  reform. 

Briefly,  the  majority  of  the  Commissioners  held  that  the  Local 
Government  Board  should  have  more  direction  and  initiative  in 
assisting  local  authorities  in  relief ;  and  that  these  latter  should 
be  entirely  reorganised.  Boards  of  Guardians  should  be  abolished 
and  replaced  by  a  "  Public  Assistance  Authority  "  in  each  county 
or  county  borough,  with  Public  Assistance  Committees  under  it 
with  delegated  powers,  one  Committee  (in  the  first  instance)  in 
each  existing  union  area.  The  poor  rate  would  be  a  county  or 
county  borough  rate.  The  Public  Assistance  Authority  would  be 
a  committee  of  the  County  or  County  Borough  Council,  half  being 
appointed  from  outside  it,  and  consisting  of  persons  experienced 
in  "  public  assistance "  (the  recommendations  avoided  the  terms 

1  Annual  Register,  1909,  pp.  9  sqq. 


I88  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

"  poor  "  and  "charity"),  and  one-third  retiring  each  year.  Women 
were  to  be  eligible  under  either  head.  The  Public  Assistance 
Committees  were  to  be  appointed  by  the  authority,  and  to  include 
representatives  of  the  local  Urban  and  Rural  District  Councils, 
and  of  the  Local  Voluntary  Aid  Committees  of  which  the  Report 
contemplated  the  formation.  Of  these  Public  Assistance  Com- 
mittees at  least  one-third  should  ordinarily  be  women,  and  the 
members  should  be  experienced  in  "  public  assistance."  One-third 
should  retire  annually,  but  should  be  re-eligible.  For  London  the 
general  scheme  was  modified  as  follows  :  half  of  that  half  of  the 
Public  Assistance  Authority  which  was  to  consist  of  non-members 
of  the  County  Council  "  skilled  in  public  assistance  "  was  to  be 
appointed  by  the  Local  Government  Board,  so  as  to  secure  repre- 
sentation of  the  medical  and  legal  professions,  employers  and 
workmen,  hospitals  and  charities,  etc. ;  and  the  Public  Assistance 
Committees  would  contain  some  borough  councillors.  The  poor 
rate,  moreover,  was  to  be  made  uniform  throughout  London. 

The  Public  Assistance  Committees  in  each  area  were  to  take 
their  powers  from  the  Authority ;  they  were  to  inquire  into  cases 
for  assistance,  administer  aid  in  conjunction  with  the  Voluntary 
Aid  Committees,  and  supervise  the  public  charitable  institutions 
within  their  areas.  These  would  be  of  seven  kinds,  the  old  work- 
houses being  abolished:  institutions  for  (i)  children,  (2)  the  aged 
and  infirm,  (3)  the  sick,  (4)  able-bodied  men,  (5)  able-bodied  women, 
(6)  vagrants,  and  (7)  the  feeble-minded  and  epileptic.  In  each 
subordinate  area,  alongside  the  Public  Assistance  and  Voluntary 
Aid  Committees,  there  was  to  be  a  Labour  Exchange  and  a  State- 
aided  organisation  of  unemployment  insurance.  The  unemployed 
would  be  dealt  with  by  the  Public  Assistance  Authority  ;  but  those 
who  required  detention  and  discipline  would  be  transferred  to 
Labour  Colonies  under  the  Home  Department. 

The  Commission,  while  admitting  many  exceptions,  found  the 
work  of  Boards  of  Guardians  generally  unsatisfactory,  and  con- 
cluded that  general  workhouses,  the  consequence  of  the  existing 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  1 89 

small  areas,  were  often  ill-administered  and  normally  demoralising. 
Out-relief  was  given  in  doles,  and  often  inadequately,  and  some- 
times "  subsidised  dirt,  disease  and  immorality."  The  elective  sys- 
tem failed  to  get  a  sufficiency  of  competent  guardians,  and  little 
interest  was  taken  in  the  elections.  It  was  claimed  by  the  Com- 
mission that  their  scheme  would  insure  the  co-operation  of  local 
and  private  charity  with  the  public  authorities ;  members  of  the 
Public  Assistance  bodies  would  sit  on  the  Voluntary  Aid  Commit- 
tees and  Councils,  and  vice  versa,  and  the  Charity  Commission 
would  receive  widened  powers  and  be  affiliated  to  the  Local  Gov- 
ernment Board.  In  each  county  or  county  borough  the  Voluntary 
Aid  Committees  would  be  under  a  council,  formed  under  a  scheme 
approved  by  the  Charity  Commission,  and  containing,  besides 
members  of  the  Public  Assistance  Authority,  trustees  of  endowed 
charities,  representatives  of  registered  voluntary  charities,  trade 
associations,  friendly  societies  and  co-opted  persons ;  this  body 
would  advise,  and  collect  funds  for,  the  Voluntary  Aid  Committees 
in  its  area ;  and  these  latter  would  aid  cases  unsuitable  for  public 
assistance,  or  referred  to  them  by  the  Public  Assistance  Committee 
of  their  area.  They  would  investigate,  aid,  visit,  and  register  cases, 
and  would  be  eligible  for  grants  from  the  Public  Assistance 
Authority,  but  would  also  raise  money  by  subscription.  Disfran- 
chisement on  account  of  public  assistance  would  be  confined  to 
those  assisted  for  more  than  three  months  in  the  qualifying  year, 
and  reception  of  medical  relief  should  not  disfranchise.  Careful 
classification  of  the  recipients  of  relief,  now  officially  to  be  described 
as  "  necessitous,"  not  "  destitute,"  and  different  treatment  of  the 
different  classes,  were  throughout  contemplated,  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  temporary  commission  under  the  Local  Government 
Board  was  recommended  to  bring  the  new  system  into  working. 

One  of  the  most  impressive  portions  of  the  Majority  Report 
dealt  with  unemployment  and  the  efforts  hitherto  made  to  relieve 
it.  It  was  pointed  out  that  in  spite  of  improvements  in  economic 
conditions,  machinery   and  the  stress  of  competition  demanded 


190  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

more  skill  than  most  workmen  possessed,  and  tended  to  throw  out 
men  at  an  increasingly  early  age.  Thus  there  was  a  mass  of  casual 
unskilled  labor,  swelled  by  the  skilled  men  thrown  out  of  work  by 
changes  in  manufacture  ;  there  were  no  means  of  getting  such 
men  fresh  employment,  and  the  total  amount  of  the  unskilled 
labour  was  unknown.  The  workhouse  and  labour-yard  tended  to 
produce  inefficiency  and  degrade  the  efficient ;  outdoor  relief,  un- 
employed relief  funds,  and  municipal  relief  works  were  similarly 
unsatisfactory  and  tended  to  concentrate  instead  of  dispersing  in- 
efficient casual  labour  ;  the  Unemployed  Act  of  1905,  while  useful 
in  that  it  prepared  for  a  diagnosis  of  the  evil  and  a  classification 
and  dispersal  of  the  unemployed,  had  in  fact  perpetuated  the  old 
evils  of  provision  for  the  casual  labourer  by  relief  works  and  had 
failed  to  continue  to  attract  charitable  funds.  The  Commission 
saw  remedies  for  unemployment :  (i)  in  better  education,  a  higher 
age  for  leaving  school,  and  means  for  diverting  boys  from  unskilled 
occupations  ending  with  manhood  (an  evil  on  which  special  stress 
was  laid),  by  technical  training,  and  advice  to  parents ;  (2)  in  a 
national  system  of  Labour  Exchanges,  in  the  "  regularisation  of 
employment"  by  public  bodies  (in  getting  their  own  work  done  at 
slack  times)  and  in  Unemployment  Assurance,  which  should  be 
voluntary,  and  conducted  by  trade  unions  and  provident  organisa- 
tions subsidised  by  the  State.  For  the  various  classes  of  unem- 
ployed various  treatment  was  proposed,  including  detention  for 
the  loafers  and  emigration. 

The  Minority  Report  of  500  pages,  signed  by  four  Com- 
missioners,—  the  Rev.  H.  Russell  Wakefield,  Mr.  F.  Chandler, 
Mr.  George  Lansbury,  and  Mrs.  Sidney  Webb,  —  started  from  the 
same  basic  conceptions  as  the  majority,  but  went  a  good  deal  further 
and  produced  a  more  systematised  and  uniform  scheme.  Holding 
that  the  regular  "  destitution  authorities  "  —  the  Boards  of  Guard- 
ians —  were  having  their  work  overlapped  and  encroached  on  by 
"specialised  authorities,"  i.e.,  the  Education,  Health  and  Asylums 
Committees  of  the  County  and  Borough  Councils,  and  the  Old 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  191 

Age  Pensions  Committees,  and  also  by  unsystematised  charitable 
work  of  various  descriptions,  the  minority  held  that  the  functions 
of  the  Guardians  (and  the  poor  law  functions  of  the  Scottish 
Parish  Councils)  should  be  transferred  to  the  County  or  County 
Borough  Council  and  exercised  through  its  Committees.  The  pro- 
vision for  the  able-bodied  and  the  non-able-bodied  requiring  relief 
should  be  wholly  separated,  the  latter  being  dealt  with  by  the  Com- 
mittees of  the  Council ;  and  under  each  County  or  County  Borough 
Council  there  should  be  a  registrar  of  Public  Assistance  with  a 
staff,  who  should  register  cases  requiring  relief,  assess  and  recover 
the  charges  made  by  Parliament  for  the  purpose,  and  sanction  the 
grants  of  "  Home  Aliment "  proposed  by  the  committee.  The 
various  committees  would  be  under  separate  Government  depart- 
ments. The  duty  of  organising  the  national  labour  market  so  as 
to  prevent  or  minimise  unemployment  should  be  laid  on  a  special 
Ministry  of  Labour,  which  should  arrange  a  ten  years'  programme 
of  Government  work,  to  cost  ^^4,000, 000  a  year,  but  to  be  under- 
taken only  in  "  the  lean  years  of  the  trade  cycle,"  and  carried  out 
by  ordinary  labour  paid  at  ordinary  local  rates. 

The  chances  of  acceptance  of  the  Minority  Report  were  obvi- 
ously remote.-^  Towards  the  vast  schemes  of  the  Majority  Report 
a  beginning  was  made  during  the  session  of  1909  by  the  Labour 
Exchanges  Bill ;  the  rest  was  left  for  future  years. 

Extract  j/ 

GOVERNMENT  PROPOSALS  ON  UNEMPLOYMENT 

(J/;'.  \\'iiisto)i  C/nnr/u7/,  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  Couimons, 
May  ig,  igog) 

Mr.  Churchill  ^ :  I  am  indebted  to  my  hon.  Friend  [Mr. 
Pickersgill]  whose  Motion  occupies  the  Paper  this  evening  for  the 
opportunity  which  his  Motion  affords  of  making  some  statement 

1  Cf.  Annual  Register,  IQ09,  pp.  9  sqq. 

2  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  5,  col.  ^99  sqq. 


192  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

upon  the  subject  of  unemployment  and  the  measures  to  be  taken 
to  cope  with  that  problem  on  behalf  of  the  Government. 

There  are  three  Departments  in  the  State  which  are  in  the  main 
concerned  with  the  Motion  which  the  hon.  Member  has  brought 
forward.  They  are  the  Home  Office,  the  Local  Government  Board, 
and  the  Board  of  Trade,  and  each  Department  is  concerned  with 
a  different  part  of  that  problem.  The  Home  Office  is  concerned 
with  the  regulatory  and  disciplinary  aspect,  with  the  Factory  Acts, 
and  so  on.  The  Board  of  Trade  is  concerned  with  the  organisa- 
tion of  industry,  so  far  as  the  Government  may  properly  concern 
itself  with  the  organisation  of  industry,  and  the  Local  Government 
Board  is  the  Department  which  deals  with  relief,  with  curative  and 
relieving  processes  apart  from  the  functions  of  the  other  two 
Departments  that  I  have  mentioned. 

And  it  is  with  the  organisation  section  of  the  problem  that  it 
will  be  my  duty  to  deal  as  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  and 
any  suggestions  or  proposals  which  I  may  submit  in  the  course  of 
this  Debate  are  concerned  with  organisation,  and  with  organisation 
alone.  They  do  not  extend  to  other  aspects  of  the  problem,  in 
some  of  which  my  right  hon.  Friend  is  deeply  and  actively  con- 
cerned at  the  present  time,  but  only  with  this  one  aspect  of  organ- 
isation ;  and  the  proposals  which  I  shall  venture  to  submit  to  the 
House  must  not,  I  ask,  be  judged  as  if  they  were  an  attempt  to 
cover  the  whole  field  of  these  larger  questions,  but  must  only  be 
judged  in  so  far  as  they  deal  with  that  particular  sphere  which 
falls  to  the  province  of  the  Board  of  Trade. 

The  first  proposal  which  I  think  emerges  from  the  argument  of 
the  hon.  Gentleman  is  the  proposal  to  establish  a  system  of  labour 
exchanges,  and  I  hope  to  ask  the  House  to-morrow  for  permission 
to  introduce  a  Bill  for  the  establishment  of  a  national  system  of 
labour  exchanges. 

There  is  high  authority  for  such  a  measure.  The  Majority  and 
Minority  Reports  of  the  Poor  Law  Commission,  differing  in  so 
much,  agreeing  in  so  little,  are  agreed  unanimously  in  advocating 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  193 

a  system  of  labour  exchanges  as  the  first  step  which  should  be 
taken  in  coping  with  the  problem  of  poverty  and  unemployment. 
Conferences  were  held  in  London  the  other  day  by  delegates  who 
represented  1,400,000  trade  unionists  who  passed  a  resolution  in 
favour  of  this  policy.  The  Central  (Unemployed)  Body,  who  are 
equally  concerned  in  these  matters,  have  approved  of  that  policy. 
The  delegates  of  the  Labour  party  who  went  to  Germany  a  few 
months  ago  returned  greatly  impressed  with  the  exchanges  which 
they  saw  at  work  in  Germany.  Economists  as  diverse  in  their  opin- 
ions as  Professor  Ashley,  of  Birmingham,  and  Professor  Chapman, 
of  Manchester  —  leading  exponents  of  Tariff  Reform  and  of  Free 
Trade  —  have  all  publicly  testified  in  favour,  of  such  proposals; 
and  several  prominent  Members  of  the  Front  Opposition  Bench 
have  in  public,  either  in  evidence  before  the  Commission  or  in 
speeches  in  the  country,  expressed  themselves  as  supporters  of 
such  a  policy.  The  argument  from  authority  is  reinforced  by  the 
argument  from  example,  because  as  early  as  1904  Germany,  Austria, 
Switzerland,  France,  and  Belgium  all  exhibited  the  system  of  public 
labour  exchanges  and  public  labour  bureaux  in  full  working  order  ; 
and  since  1904  Norway  has  also  adopted  some  application  of  that 
system.  Mr.  Bliss,  who  was  sent  over  by  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  to  investigate  the  conditions  and  methods  of  dealing 
with  unemployment  in  European  countries  last  year,  has,  in  the 
May  bulletin  for  last  year  of  the  Washington  Bureau  of  Labour, 
surveyed  the  whole  field  of  unemployment  organisations  in  Euro- 
pean countries  and  has  come  to  the  conclusion  that  a  principal 
element  in  the  methods  by  which  that  difficulty  may  be  success- 
fully treated  lies  in  the  establishment  of  public  labour  exchanges ; 
and  he  draws  great  attention  to  the  rapid  and  successful  develop- 
ment in  the  last  fifteen  years  of  the  system  in  Germany.  So  we 
not  only  have  the  practical  consensus  of  opinion  of  all  authorities, 
irrespective  of  party,  irrespective  of  the  point  of  view  in  this  country 
in  favour  of  such  a  system,  but  we  have  the  evidence  of  the  success- 
ful practice  of  the  greatest  industrial  community  on  the  Continent 


194  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

and  its  continuous  extension  in  different  forms  and  under  different 
circumstances  to  many  other  countries  of  the  Continent  of  Europe. 

With  such  argument  from  authority  and  example  it  is  hardly 
necessary  to  submit  the  case  upon  its  merits,  but  there  are  two 
general  defects  in  the  industrial  position  of  this  country  which  are 
singled  out  by  the  Royal  Commission,  the  lack  of  mobility  of  labour 
and  the  lack  of  information  about  all  these  questions  of  unemploy- 
ment. For  both  of  these  defects  the  policy  of  labour  exchanges 
is  calculated  to  afford  a  remedy.  Modern  industry  is  national.  The 
facilities  of  transport  and  communication  knit  the  country  together 
as  no  country  has  ever  been  knitted  before.  Labour  alone  has 
not  profited  by  this  improved  organisation.  The  method  by  which 
labour  obtains  its  market  to-day  is  the  old  method,  the  demoralising 
method  of  personal  application,  hawking  labour  about  from  place 
to  place,  and  treating  a  job  as  if  it  were  a  favour  —  looking  at  it 
as  if  it  were  a  favour,  as  a  thing  which  places  a  man  under  an 
obligation  when  he  has  got  it.  Labour  exchanges  will  increase  the 
mobility  of  labour,  but  to  increase  the  mobility  of  labour  is  not  to 
increase  the  movement  of  labour.  To  increase  the  mobility  of 
labour  is  only  to  render  the  movement  of  labour  when  it  has 
become  necessarily  less  painful.  The  movement  of  labour  when 
it  is  necessary  should  be  effected  with  the  least  friction,  the  least 
suffering,  the  least  loss  of  time  and  of  status  to  the  individual  who 
is  called  upon  by  the  force  of  economic  conditions  to  move.  It 
would  be  a  great  injustice  to  the  policy  of  labour  exchanges  if  it 
were  supposed  that  it  would  be  the  cause  of  sending  workmen  gad- 
ding about  from  pillar  to  post  throughout  the  country,  whereas  the 
only  result  of  the  policy  will  be,  not  to  make  it  necessary  for  any 
man  to  move  who  does  not  need  to  move  to-day,  but  to  make  it 
easy  for  him  to  move  the  moment  the  ordinary  economic  events 
arise  which  make  the  movement  necessary. 

There  is  another  thing  in  connection  with  labour  exchanges. 
They  will  not  to  any  large  extent  create  new  employment.  In  so 
far  as  facilities  for  getting  labour  on  particular  occasions  sometimes 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  195 

lead  to  extra  men  being  taken  on,  they  will  increase  employment. 
That,  however,  is  only  a  very  small  result.  They  will  not  directly 
add  to  the  volume  of  employment.  I  never  contemplated  that  they 
should.  It  would  be  to  invest  the  policy  with  an  air  of  humbug  if 
we  were  to  pretend  that  labour  exchanges  are  going  to  make  more 
work.  They  are  not.  What  they  are  going  to  do  is  to  organise 
the  existing  labour,  to  reduce  the  friction  which  has  attended  the 
working  of  the  existing  economic  and  industrial  system  ;  by  reduc- 
ing the  friction  of  that  system  we  cannot  help  raising  the  general 
standard  of  economic  life. 

As  to  lack  of  information,  labour  exchanges  must  afford  infor- 
mation of  the  highest  value  in  the  sphere  of  social  subjects  on 
which  we  are  lamentably  ill-informed.  In  proportion  as  this  sys- 
tem comes  to  be  used,  it  will  afford  us  accurate  contemporary  in- 
formation about  the  demand  for  labour,  both  as  to  the  quantity  and 
the  quality  of  that  demand,  as  between  one  trade  and  another,  and 
as  between  one  district  and  another,  and  as  between  one  season 
and  another,  and  one  cycle  and  another.  It  will  enable  us  to  tell 
workmen  in  search  of  work  where  to  go,  and  it  will  also  enable  us, 
which  is  not  the  least  important,  to  tell  them  where  not  to  go.  Over 
and  over  again  at  the  present  time  men  are  led  by  the  rumours  of 
work.  They  crowd  into  a  district,  to  find  that  there  is  no  gratifica- 
tion of  their  hope,  and,  if  there  is  gratification,  it  is  wholly  insuffi- 
cient for  the  numbers  who  have  been  led  to  make  that  desultory 
pilgrimage.  In  association  with  the  school  employment  bureaux 
which  so  many  educational  authorities  are  now  starting  in  Scotland, 
and  to  a  lesser  extent  in  England,  we  hope  that  the  system  of 
labour  exchanges  will  have  the  effect  of  enabling  us  to  guide  to 
some  extent  a  new  generation  into  the  trades  which  are  not  over- 
stocked and  which  are  not  declining,  and  to  prevent  the  exploi- 
tation of  boy  labour,  to  which  the  hon.  Member  for  Leicester 
[Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald]  has  referred. 

So  far  as  local  and  accidental  unemployment  is  concerned,  by 
which  I  mean  unemployment  in  one  place  when  there  is  a  demand 


196  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

for  labour  in  another,  the  labour  exchanges  will  undoubtedly  diminish 
that  evil.  They  are,  further,  the  only  method  of  grappling  with  the 
evils  of  casual  employment,  which  are  singled  out  by  the  Royal 
Commission  as  being  the  original  fountain  of  so  many  of  the 
greatest  evils  in  our  social  life.  We  hope  that  they  will  help  to 
the  process  of  dovetailing  one  seasonal  trade  into  another,  so  that 
people  who  are  always  slack  at  a  particular  season  in  one  trade 
may  acquire  in  some  cases  a  secondary  trade  which  is  only  brisk 
at  that  season,  and. which  will  enable  them  to  obtain  a  uniform 
average  in  the  economy  of  their  domestic  life. 

Labour  exchanges,  by  dispensing  with  the  need  of  wandering 
in  search  of  work,  will  render  it  for  the  first  time  possible  to  deal 
stringently  with  vagrants.  I  am  quite  sure  that  those  who  know 
the  sort  of  humiliation  to  which  the  genuine  workingman  is  sub- 
ject, by  being  very  often  indistinguishable  from  one  of  the  class 
of  mere  loafers  and  vagrants,  will  recognise  as  of  great  importance 
any  steps  which  can  sharply  and  irretrievably  divide  the  two  classes 
in  our  society. 

Lastly,  labour  exchanges  are  indispensable  to  any  system  of 
unemployment  insurance,  or,  indeed,  I  think  to  any  other  honour- 
able method  of  relieving  unemployment,  since  it  is  not  possible  to 
make  the  distinction  between  the  vagrant  and  the  loafer  on  the  one 
hand  and  the  bona  fide  workman  on  the  other,  except  in  conjunc- 
tion with  some  elaborate  and  effective  system  of  testing  willingness 
to  work  such  as  is  afforded  by  the  system  of  labour  exchanges. 

I  shall  to-morrow  have  an  opportunity  of  asking  the  permission 
of  the  House  to  introduce  this  Bill,  and  we  present  it  to  the 
House  as  a  piece  of  social  machiner)^,  nothing  more  and  nothing 
less,  the  need  of  which  has  long  been  apparent,  and  the  want  of 
which  has  been  widely  and  cruelly  felt  by  large  numbers  of  our 
fellow  countrymen.  I  said  a  little  earlier  that  we  might  profit  by 
the  example  of  Germany,  but  we  may  do  more,  we  may  improve 
on  the  example  of  Germany.  The  German  system  of  labour  ex- 
changes, although  co-ordinated  and  encouraged  by  the  State  and 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  197 

by  the  Imperial  Government,  is,  nevertheless,  mainly  municipal  in 
its  character.  Starting  here  with  a  clear  field,  and  with  the  advan- 
tage of  experience  and  of  experiments  in  other  lands,  we  may,  I 
think,  begin  at  a  higher  level  and  on  a  larger  scale  than  has  been 
done  in  any  other  country  up  to  the  present  time.  The  utility  of 
a  system  of  labour  exchanges,  like  the  utility  of  any  other  market, 
increases  with  its  range  and  scope,  and  we  propose,  as  the  first 
principle  of  our  system  of  labour  exchanges,  to  adopt  a  plan  which 
shall  be  uniform  and  national  in  its  character,  and  in  that  we  are 
supported  both  by  the  Minority  and  Majority  Reports  of  the  Royal 
Commission  on  the  Poor  Law. 

During  the  last  few  months  a  Departmental  Committee  has  been 
sitting  at  the  Board  of  Trade  elaborating  details  of  this  scheme, 
and  I  am  glad  to  tell  the  House  and  the  hon.  Members  who  moved 
and  seconded  this  Motion  that  those  details  are  now  very  far  ad- 
vanced. We  should  propose,  if  the  House  assent  to  the  Bill,  to 
divide  the  whole  country  into  about  ten  divisions,  each  with  a 
Divisional  Clearing  House,  and  presided  over  by  a  divisional  chief, 
and  all  co-ordinated  with  a  National  Clearing  House  in  London. 
Distributed  amongst  those  ten  divisions  will  be  between  30  and 
40  first-class  labour  exchanges  in  towns  of  100,000  or  upwards, 
and  about  45  second-class  labour  exchanges  in  towns  between 
50,000  and  100,000,  and  150  minor  offtces  and  sub-offices,  third- 
class  labour  exchanges,  with  waiting  rooms,  will  be  established  in 
the  smaller  centres.  The  control  of  this  system  will  be  exercised 
by  the  Board  of  Trade.  In  order  to  secure  absolute  impartiality 
as  between  capital  and  labour,  we  propose  that  a  joint  Advisory 
Committee  should  be  established  in  every  principal  centre,  on 
which  representatives  of  the  workers  and  representatives  of 
the  employers  shall  meet  in  equal  numbers  under  an  impartial 
chairman.  .  .  . 

If  Parliament  should  assent  to  the  Bill  this  Session  without  undue 
delay  I  should  hope  to  bring  this  system  of  Labour  Exchanges  into 
simultaneous  operation  all  over  the  country  so  far  as  practicable  in 


198  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  early  months  of  next  year.  Temporary  premises  will  be  engaged 
in  the  first  instance  everywhere,  but  at  the  same  time  I  think  it 
very  important  that  we  should  have  permanent  premises.  A  build- 
ing programme  is  being  prepared  by  which  we  will  erect  so  many 
labour  exchanges  every  year  until  in  about  ten  years,  so  far  as  first- 
class  exchanges  are  concerned,  we  shall  be  permanently  housed. 
This  has  been  all  worked  out  in  very  careful  detail. 

The  expense  of  this  system  will  no  doubt  be  considerable.  The  or- 
dinary working  of  the  system  will  not  be  less  than  about  ^170,000 
per  year,  and  during  the  period  when  the  building  is  going  on 
the  expenditure  will  rise  to  about  ^200,000  per  year,  not  ever  above 
^200,000  during  the  next  ten  years.  We  hope  that  the  labour 
exchanges  will  become  industrial  centres  in  each  town.  We  hope 
they  will  become  a  labour  market,  we  hope  they  will  become  an 
office  where  the  Trade  Board  will  hold  its  meetings  as  a  natural 
course,  and  that  they  will  be  open  to  trade  unions,  with  whom  we 
desire  to  co-operate  in  every  way  on  the  closest  and  frankest  terms, 
while  preserving  our  impartiality  between  capital  and  labour.  We 
hope  that  the  trade  unions  will  keep  their  vacant  book  in  some 
cases  at  the  exchanges.  We  hope  that  the  structure  of  those 
exchanges  will  be  such  as  to  enable  us  to  have  rooms  which  can 
be  let  to  trade  unions  at  a  rent  for  benefit  and  other  meetings  so 
as  to  avoid  the  necessity  under  which  all  but  the  strongest  unions 
lie  at  the  present  time  — -  of  conducting  their  meetings  in  licensed 
premises.  The  exchanges  may  in  some  cases  afford  facilities  for 
washing,  clothes  mending,  and  for  non-alcoholic  refreshments  to 
persons  who  are  attending  them.  Separate  provision  will  be  made 
for  men  and  for  women,  and  for  skilled  and  unskilled  labour.  Boy 
labour  will  be  dealt  with  in  conjunction  with  the  local  education 
authority,  because  we  have  no  intention  of  allowing  the  commercial 
side  to  override  the  educational  side  in  regard  to  young  people. 
Travelling  expenses  can  be  advanced  on  loan,  it  is  contem- 
plated, to  workmen  by  whom  situations  have  been  procured  if  the 
Management  Committee  think  fit. 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  199 

I  do  not  want  to  go  into  all  the  details.  They  have  been  studied 
very  carefully,  and  I  shall  be  prepared  when  we  are  at  closer  quar- 
ters on  the  Bill  to  give  the  fullest  information  and  to  discuss  without 
restraint  of  any  kind  all  those  special  aspects  and  points  to  which 
I  have  referred. 

So  much  for  the  policy  of  labour  exchanges.  That  is  a  policy 
complete  in  itself.  It  would  be  considerable  if  it  stood  alone,  but 
it  does  not  stand  alone.  As  my  right  hon.  Friend  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  has  announced  in  his  Budget  speech,  the  Govern- 
ment propose  to  associate  with  the  policy  of  labour  exchanges 
unemployment  insurance.  The  hon.  Member  who  moved  this 
Motion  has  referred  particularly  to  the  Minority  Report.  He  knows 
that  the  Minority  Report  advocates  a  system  of  compulsory  labour 
exchanges,  that  no  person  shall  engage  any  man  for  less  than  a 
month  except  through  a  labour  exchange.  That  is  not  the  pro- 
posal we  are  making.  We  are  making  a  proposal  of  voluntary 
labour  exchanges.  I  am  quite  ready  to  admit  that  no  system  of 
voluntary  labour  exchanges  by  itself  deals  adequately  with  the 
evils  and  difficulties  of  casual  labour,  but  there  is  one  reason 
against  compulsory  labour  exchanges  at  the  present  time.  My  hon. 
Friend  foresaw  it.  To  establish  a  system  of  compulsory  labour 
exchanges,  to  eliminate  casual  labour,  to  divide  among  a  certain 
proportion  of  workers  all  available  employment  would  absolutely 
and  totally  cast  out  a  surplus  of  unemployed,  before  you  have  made 
preparation  for  dealing  with  that  surplus,  would  be  to  cause  an 
administrative  breakdown,  and  could  not  fail  to  be  attended  with 
the  gravest  possible  disaster.  Therefore  until  poor  law  reform, 
which  falls  to  the  Department  of  my  right  hon.  Friend  Mr.  Burns, 
and  with  which  he  and  those  who  are  working  with  him  are  engaged, 
has  made  further  progress,  to  establish  a  compulsory  system  of 
labour  exchanges  would  naturally  increase  and  not  diminish  the 
miseries  with  which  we  are  seeking  to  cope.  We  have,  therefore, 
decided  that  our  system  of  labour  exchanges  shall  be  voluntary  in 
its  character.   For  that  very  reason  there  is  a  great  danger,  to  which 


200  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

I  have  never  shut  my  eyes,  that  the  highest  ranks  of  labour,  skilled 
workers,  members  of  strong  trade  unions,  would  not  think  it  nec- 
essary to  use  the  exchanges,  but  .would  use  the  very  excellent  appa- 
ratus which  they  have  established  themselves,  that  this  expensive 
system  of  exchanges  which  we  are  calling  into  being  would  come 
to  be  used  only  by  the  poorest  of  the  workers  in  the  labour  markets 
and,  consequently,  would  gradually  relapse  and  fall  back  into  the 
purely  distress  machinery,  not  economic  machinery,  from  which 
we  are  labouring  to  extricate  and  separate  it.  It  is  for  that  reason, 
quite  apart  from  the  merits  of  the  scheme  of  unemployment  insur- 
ance, that  the  Government  are  very  anxious  to  associate  with  their 
scheme  of  labour  exchanges  a  system  of  unemployment  insurance. 
If  labour  exchanges  depend  for  their  effective  initiation  or  inau- 
guration upon  unemployment  insurance  being  associated  with  them, 
it  is  equally  true  to  say  that  no  scheme  of  unemployment  insurance 
can  be  worked  except  in  conjunction  with  some  apparatus  for  find- 
ing work  and  testing  willingness  to  work,  like  labour  exchanges. 
The  two  systems  are  complementary  ;  they  are  man  and  wife  ;  they 
mutually  support  and  sustain  each  other. 

So  I  come  to  unemployment  insurance.  It  is  not  practicable  at 
the  present  time  to  establish  a  universal  system  of  unemployment 
insurance.  It  would  be  risking  the  policy  to  cast  one's  net  so  wide. 
We,  therefore,  have  to  choose  at  the  very  outset  of  this  subject 
between  insuring  some  workmen  in  all  trades  and  insuring  all 
workmen  in  some  trades.  That  is  the  first  parting  of  the  ways 
upon  unemployment  insurance.  In  the  first  case  we  can  have  a 
voluntary  and  in  the  second  case  a  compulsory  system.  If  you 
adopt  a  voluntary  system  of  unemployment  insurance,  you  are 
always  exposed  to  this  difficulty.  The  risk  of  unemployment  varies 
so  much  between  man  and  man,  according  to  their  qualities ; 
character,  circumstances,  temperament,  demeanour  towards  their 
superiors  —  these  are  all  factors ;  and  the  risk  varies  so  much  be- 
tween man  and  man  that  a  voluntary  system  of  unemployment 
insurance  which  the  State  subsidises  always  attracts  those  workers 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  20I 

who  are  most  likely  to  be  unemployed.  That  is  why  all  voluntary 
systems  have  broken  down  when  they  have  been  tried,  because  they 
accumulate  a  preponderance  of  bad  risks  against  the  insurance 
office,  which  is  fatal  to  its  financial  stability.  On  the  other  hand, 
a  compulsory  system  of  insurance,  which  did  not  add  to  the  con- 
tribution of  the  workers  a  substantial  contribution  from  outside,  has 
also  broken  down,  because  of  the  refusal  of  the  higher  class  of 
worker  to  assume  unsupported  a  share  of  the  burden  of  the  weaker 
members  of  the  community.  We  have  decided  to  avoid  these  diffi- 
culties. Our  insurance  scheme  will  present  four  main  features.  It 
will  involve  contributions  from  the  workpeople  and  from  the  em- 
ployers ;  those  contributions  will  be  aided  by  a  substantial  subven- 
tion from  the  State  ;  it  will  be  insurance  by  trades,  following  the 
suggestion  of  the  Royal  Commission ;  and  it  will  be  compulsory 
within  those  trades  upon  all,  unionist  and  non-unionist,  skilled  and 
unskilled,  workmen  and  employers  alike.  The  hon.  Member  for 
Leicester  [Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald]  with  great  force  showed  that 
to  confine  a  scheme  of  unemployment  insurance  merely  to  trade 
unionists  would  be  trifling  with  the  subject.  It  would  only  be  aiding 
those  who  have  been  most  able  to  aid  themselves,  without  at  the 
same  time  assisting  those  who  hitherto  under  existing  conditions 
have  not  been  able  to  make  any  effective  provision. 

To  what  trades  ought  we,  as  a  beginning,  to  apply  our  system 
of  compulsory  contributory  unemployment  insurance  ?  There  is  a 
group  of  trades  well  marked  out  for  this  class  of  treatment.  They 
are  trades  in  which  unemployment  is  not  only  high,  but  chronic, 
for  even  in  the  best  of  times  it  persists ;  where  it  is  not  only  high, 
and  chronic,  but  marked  by  seasonal  and  cyclical  fluctuations,  and 
wherever  and  howsoever  it  occurs  it  takes  the  form  not  of  short 
time  or  of  any  of  those  devices  for  spreading  wages  and  equalising 
or  averaging  risks,  but  of  a  total,  absolute,  periodical  discharge  of  a 
certain  proportion  of  the  workers.  These  are  the  trades  to  which,  in 
the  first  instance,  we  think  the  system  of  unemployment  insurance 
ought  to  be  applied.    The  group  of  trades  which  we  contemplate 


202  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

to  be  the  subject  of  our  scheme  are  these :  house  building  and 
works  of  construction,  engineering,  machine  and  tool  making,  ship 
and  boat  building,  vehicles,  sawyers,  and  general  labourers  working 
at  these  trades. 

Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald  :  Is  the  engineering  civil  engineering 
or  mechanical  ? 

Mr.  Churchill  :  The  whole  group  of  mechanical  engineering 
trades.  That  is  a  very  considerable  group  of  industries.  They 
comprise,  according  to  the  last  Census  Reports,  two  and  a  quarter 
millions  of  adult  workers.  Two  and  a  quarter  millions  of  adult 
workers  are,  roughly  speaking,  one-third  of  the  adult  population  of 
these  three  kingdoms  engaged  in  purely  industrial  work ;  that  is  to 
say,  excluding  commercial,  professional,  agricultural,  and  domestic 
occupations.  Of  the  remaining  two-thirds  of  the  adult  industrial 
population,  nearly  one-half  are  employed  in  the  textile  trades,  in 
mining,  on  the  railways,  in  the  merchant  marine,  and  in  other  trades, 
which  either  do  not  present  the  same  features  of  unemployment 
which  we  see  in  the  precarious  trades,  or  which,  by  the  adoption  of 
short  time  or  other  arrangements,  avoid  the  total  discharge  of  a  pro- 
portion of  workmen  from  time  to  time.  So  that  this  group  of  trades 
to  which  we  propose  to  apply  the  system  of  unemployment  insur- 
ance, roughly  speaking,  covers  very  nearly  half  of  the  whole  field 
of  unemployment.  That  half,  on  the  whole,  is  perhaps  the  worst 
half.  The  financial  and  actuarial  basis  of  the  scheme  has  been  very 
carefully  studied  by  the  light  of  all  available  information.  The  re- 
port of  the  actuarial  authorities  whom  I  have  consulted  leaves  me 
no  doubt  that,  even  after  all  allowance  has  been  made  for  the  fact 
that  unemployment  may  be  more  rife  in  the  less  organised  and 
less  highly  skilled  trades  than  in  the  trade  unions  who  pay  unem- 
ployment benefits,  —  that  is  a  fact  which  is  not  proved,  and  which 
I  am  not  at  all  convinced  of,  —  there  is  no  doubt  whatever  that  a 
financially  sound  scheme  can  be  evolved  which,  in  return  for  mod- 
erate contributions,  will  yield  adequate  benefits.  I  am  not  going 
to  offer  figures  of  contributions  or  benefits  to  the  House  at  this 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  203 

stage,  though  I  should  not  be  unable  to  do  so.  I  confine  myself 
to  stating  that  we  propose  to  aim  at  a  scale  of  benefits  which  is 
somewhat  lower  both  in  amount  and  in  duration  than  those  which 
the  strongest  trade  unions  pay  at  the  present  time.  Nevertheless, 
they  will  be  benefits  which  will  afford  substantial  weekly  payments 
for  a  period  which  will  cover  by  far  the  greater  part  of  the  period 
of  unemployment  of  all  unemployed  persons  in  this  great  group  of 
insured  trades.  In  order  to  enable  such  a  scale  of  benefits  to  be 
paid  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  raise  something  between  5d. 
and  6d.  —  rather  nearer  6d.  than  5d.  —  per  man  per  week.  That 
sum,  we  propose,  should  be  made  up  by  contributions,  not  neces- 
sarily equal,  between  the  workman,  the  employer,  and  the  State. 
For  such  a  sacrifice  —  and  it  is  not,  I  think,  an  exorbitant  one, 
which,  fairly  adjusted,  will  not  hamper  industry  nor  burden  labour, 
nor  cause  an  undue  strain  upon  the  public  finances  —  we  believe 
it  possible  to  relieve  a  vast  portion  of  the  industrial  population  of 
these  islands  from  that  haunting  dread  and  constant  terror  which 
gnaws  out  the  very  heart  of  their  prosperity  and  content. 

The  relation  of  the  insurance  scheme  towards  the  unions  must 
be  most  carefully  considered.  We  hope  that  there  will  be  no  diffi- 
culty, as  the  discussion  on  this  subject  proceeds,  in  showing  that  we 
safeguard  all  the  institutions  which  have  made  voluntary  efforts 
in  this  direction  from  anything  like  the  unfair  competition  of  a 
national  insurance  fund.  More  than  that,  we  believe  that  the  pro- 
posals which  we  shall  make,  when  they  are  brought  forward  in 
detail,  will  act  as  a  powerful  encouragement  to  all  voluntary  agen- 
cies to  adopt  and  extend  the  system  of  unemployment  insurance. 
Yes,  but  the  House  may  say,  What  is  the  connection  of  all  this 
with  labour  exchanges  ?  I  must  apologise  for  detaining  the  House 
so  long  — 

Mr.  John  Ward  ;  This  is  the  most  interesting  part  of  your 
speech. 

Mr.  Churchill  :  But  the  machinery  of  the  insurance  office  has 
been  gone  into  with  great  detail,  and  we  propose  as  at  present 


204  BRITISH    SOCIAL   POLITICS 

advised  to  follow  the  German  example  of  insurance  cards  or  books, 
to  which  stamps  will  be  affixed  every  week.  For  as  soon  as  a  man 
in  an  insured  trade  is  without  employment,  if  he  has  kept  to  the 
rules  of  the  system,  all  he  will  have  to  do  is  to  take  his  card  to  the 
nearest  labour  exchange,  which  will  be  responsible,  in  conjunction 
with  the  insurance  office,  either  for  finding  him  a  job  or  paying  him 
his  benefits. 

I  am  very  glad,  indeed,  to  have  availed  myself  of  the  oppor- 
tunity which  my  right  hon.  Friend  has  given  me  to  submit  this 
not  inconsiderable  proposal  in  general  outline,  so  that  the  Bill  for 
labour  exchanges  which  I  will  introduce  to-morrow  may  not  be 
misjudged  as  if  it  stood  by  itself,  and  was  not  part  of  a  con- 
sidered, co-ordinated,  and  connected  scheme  to  grasp  with  this 
hideous,  crushing  evil  which  has  oppressed  for  so  long  the  mind 
of  everyone  who  cares  about  social  reform. 

We  cannot  deal  with  the  insurance  policy  this  Session  for  five 
reasons.  We  have  not  the  time  now.  We  have  not  got  the 
money  yet.  The  finances  of  this  insurance  scheme  have  got  to  be 
adjusted  and  interwoven  with  the  finances  of  the  other  schemes 
which  my  right  hon.  Friend  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  is 
engaged  upon  now  for  dealing  with  various  forms  of  invalidity  and 
other  insurance.  In  the  next  place,  labour  exchanges  are  the  nec- 
essary preliminary.  We  must  get  the  apparatus  of  the  labour  ex- 
changes into  working  order  before  this  system  of  insurance  can 
effectually  be  established  or  worked.  Lastly,  no  such  novel  depart- 
ure as  a  compulsory,  contributory  unemployment  insurance  in  a 
particular  trade  could  possibly  be  adopted  without  a  very  much 
fuller  degree  of  consultation  and  negotiation  with  the  parties  con- 
cerned than  has  been  possible  to  us  under  the  conditions  of  secrecy 
under  which  we  have  necessarily  been  working. 

In  the  autumn  the  Board  of  Trade  will  confer  with  all  the  parties 
affected  by  the  proposals  which  I  have  outlined  to-night,  and  we 
shall  endeavour,  while  not  making  the  production  of  our  proposals 
contingent  upon  their  agreement,  to  secure  as  wide  and  as  large  a 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  205 

measure  of  agreement  as  possible  of  all  these  parties,  in  order  that 
all  our  proposals  may  be  received  with  as  much  consent  as  pos- 
sible when  next  Session  they  are  presented  in  their  final  form. 

One  word  more.  The  prospect  and  pressure  of  these  consider- 
able duties  have  involved  some  rearrangement  of  the  Labour  De- 
partment of  the  Board  of  Trade.  I  propose  that  that  Department 
should  be  divided  in  the  future  into  three  distinct  sections.  The 
first  section  will  deal  with  wages  questions,  arbitration,  conciliation, 
and  with  the  Trade  Boards,  which  will  be  set  up  under  the  Trade 
Boards  Bill  if  it  should  pass  into  law.  The  second  section  will 
deal  with  statistics,  special  inquiries,  and  with  the  Labour  Gazette. 
The  third  section  will  be  occupied  with  labour  exchanges  and 
unemployment  insurance  work  in  conjunction.  One  of  the  func- 
tions of  the  last  section  will  be  to  act  as  a  kind  of  intelligence 
bureau,  watching  the  continual  changes  of  the  labour  market  here 
and  abroad,  and  suggesting  any  measure  which  may  be  practicable, 
such  as  co-ordination  and  distribution  of  Government  contracts  and 
municipal  work,  so  as  to  act  as  a  counterpoise  to  the  unemploy- 
ment of  the  labour  market,  and  it  will  also,  we  trust,  be  able  to 
conduct  examinations  of  schemes  of  public  utility,  so  that  such 
schemes,  if  decided  upon  by  the  Government  and  the  Treasury, 
can  be  set  on  foot  at  any  time  with  knowledge  and  consideration 
beforehand,  instead  of  the  haphazard,  hand-to-mouth  manner  with 
which  we  try  to  deal  with  these  emergencies  at  the  present  time. 

That  is  a  part  of  the  policy  I  have  unfolded  to-night,  which  has 
not  reached  the  same  stage  of  maturity  as  the  other  subjects  with 
which  I  have  attempted  to  deal.  I  have  only  attempted  to  fore- 
shadow them  in  the  vaguest  terms.  ...  I  have  not  trespassed 
at  all  upon  the  other  no  less  important  or  scarcely  less  important 
branches  of  this  problem,  and  I  am  quite  certain  this  Parliament 
will  gladly  exert  what  strength  remains  to  it  in  attempting  to  cope 
with  these  hideous  problems  of  social  disorganisation  and  chaos 
which  are  marring  the  happiness  of  our  country,  and  which,  unless 
grappled  with,  may  fatally  affect  its  strength  and  its  honour. 


206  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  j8 

CONSERVATIVE   POSITION  ON  UNEMPLOYMENT 
{Air.  J^.  E.  S/niih^  Coi/u/ions,  May  ig,  igog) 

Mr.  Smith  ^ :  Nobody  listening  to  the  speech  of  the  right  hon. 
Gentleman  will  make  any  complaint  of  the  length  at  which  he  dealt 
with  this  extremely  important  subject.  He  dealt  with  it  in  a  man- 
ner which  I  think  all  sections  of  the  House  will  admit  was  worthy 
of  the  importance  of  the  subject.  Perhaps,  representing  as  I  do 
a  Liverpool  Constituency,  in  which  there  is  a  great  deal  of  casual 
labour,  I  may  make  one  or  two  observations  on  the  subject  of  the 
Resolution  before  the  House  before  I  venture  to  address  one  or 
two  remarks  to  the  compulsory  insurance  proposals  which  the  right 
hon.  Gentleman  l"ias  outlined. 

So  far  as  casual  employment  is  concerned,  the  Resolution  which 
the  House  has  now  under  consideration,  I  think  probably  all  Mem- 
bers of  the  House,  wherever  they  sit,  will  agree  that  even  a  mere 
superficial  analysis  would  suggest  the  drawing  of  a  distinction  be- 
tween cyclical  fluctuations  of  unemployment  which  are  produced 
by  general  depression,  and,  in  the  second  place,  local  and  sectional 
fluctuations  produced  by  causes  only  merely  local  and,  therefore, 
more  susceptible  of  local  treatment.  If  one  gives  one's  attention 
for  a  moment  to  the  case  of  cyclical  fluctuations  in  trade,  he  Mali  at 
once  find  that  he  is  face  to  face  with  the  great  question  as  to  what 
is  the  particular  system  in  any  particular  country  which  is  best 
qualified  to  deal  with  the  general  difficulty  of  the  depression  in  trade. 
I  do  not  propose  to  embarrass  this  debate  at  this  stage  with  the 
discussion  of  that  question.  I  do  not  seek  to  introduce  the  subject 
of  Tariff  Reform,  or  the  subject  of  afforestation,  or  the  subject  of 
labour  colonies.  Every  one  of  these  is  extremely  controversial,  and 
the  value  of  any  of  them,  if  urged  as  a  practical  contribution  to  the 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  5,  col.  512  sqq. 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  20/ 

debate,  would  be  hotly  canvassed  in  some  particular  section  of  the 
House.  Perhaps,  therefore,  it  will  be  better  to  pass  by  for  the 
purposes  of  a  limited  debate  the  whole  general  question  of  cyclical 
fluctuation  of  unemployment,  the  reason  of  which  it  is  extremely 
difificult  to  discover,  and,  therefore,  it  is  better  to  deal  with  the 
question  of  local  and  sectional  fluctuation,  and  see  from  this  how 
far  the  proposals  indicated  by  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  in  the  Bill 
he  is  about  to  introduce  are  likely  to  present  anything  in  the  nature 
of  a  cure  or  at  all  events  a  palliation  for  this  local  and  sectional 
fluctuation. 

I  come  from  a  constituency  where  casual  labour  is  present.  I 
have  given  some  careful  attention  to  the  subject  and  to  the  work 
of  the  local  labour  exchanges  in  foreign  countries,  and  I  have  no 
hesitation  in  accepting  the  view  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman 
has  placed  before  the  Flouse  that  without  undue  sanguineness 
you  may  look  forward  to  labour  exchanges  to  furnish  considerable 
palliative.  It  is  extremely  important  that  the  House  should  clearly 
understand  what  is  the  nature  of  the  gain  which  they  may  reason- 
ably count  upon  these  labour  exchanges  to  furnish.  .  .  . 

Let  us  take  a  simple  illustration,  and  then  reduce  it  to  a  con- 
crete case.  Take  the  case  of  one  employer  who  employs  ten  men 
on  Monday  and  another  who  employs  ten  men  in  the  same  class  of 
employment  on  Tuesday.  If  there  is  no  such  organisation  as  that 
contemplated  by  the  labour  exchanges,  the  result  will  be  you  will 
have  twenty  men  partially  employed  on  those  two  days.  The  express 
object  of  the  organisation  and  the  labour  exchanges  is  that  instead 
of  having  twenty  men  partially  employed,  you  will  have  ten  men  fully 
employed.  It  is  quite  true  that  the  labour  is  decasualised,  and  I 
am  one  of  those  who  contemplate  the  economic  consequences  as  a 
whole  that  society  gets  by  the  decasualisation  of  the  whole  of  that 
labour.  But  it  is  very  important  that  all  engaged  in  attempting  to 
suggest  remedies  for  unemployment  should  realise  what  would  be 
involved  in  the  decasualisation  of  that  labour  in  order  to  measure 
the  admitted  gains  with  the  disadvantages,  which  cannot  certainly 


208  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

be  disputed.  It  follows  that  decasualisation  of  the  kind  contem- 
plated in  this  Resolution  replaces  ten  half-employed  men  by  five 
fully-employed  men.  If  you  are  going  to  decasualise  labour  in  that 
way,  if  you  are  going  to  see  that  the  men  who  are  doing  that 
constant  amount  of  labour  shall  have  it  more  widely  distributed,  it 
follows  that  you  are  going  to  replace  ten  half-employed  men  by 
five  fully-employed  men. 

The  right  hon.  Gentleman  stated  very  modestly  that  conclusion 
when  he  said  that  he  did  not  claim  that  labour  exchanges  would 
add  to  employment.  I  think  he  might  have  stated  it  more  strongly, 
because  not  only  will  the  establishment  of  labour  exchanges  not  add 
to  employment,  but  if  they  are  to  serve  the  only  purpose  which 
they  can  economically  serve,  the  necessary  consequence  of  their 
establishment  must  be  actually  to  diminish  employment.  I  recognise 
that,  and  although  I  do  so,  I  still  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  the 
Bill  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  is  going  to  produce  is  one 
well  worth  introducing  and  worthy  of  the  support  of  the  House. 
The  reason  which  I  venture  to  offer  to  the  House  for  that  view  is 
that,  in  my  opinion,  it  is  far  better  in  the  interests  of  society  as  a 
whole  that  you  should  have  ten  men  fully  paid  and  fully  nour- 
ished than  twenty  men  partially  paid  and  partially  nourished.  It  is 
clear  that  under  this  system  you  will  not  be  able  to  supply  even 
partial  labour  for  as  large  a  number  of  workers  as  you  find  partial 
work  for  to-day,  and  you  are  bound  to  increase  the  number  of 
men  who  will  have  to  appeal  for  corrective  treatment  or  outdoor 
relief.  I  think  it  is  important  that  those  who  are  pressing  forward 
this  proposal  to  start  labour  exchanges  should  realise  that  the  in- 
evitable economic  consequence  of  establishing  those  exchanges 
will  be  that  you  will  diminish  the  number  of  men  who  can  find 
work  of  any  kind,  although  you  are  going  to  give  them  a  larger 
living  wage. 

The  right  hon.  Gentleman  has  touched  upon  a  much  more  dif- 
ficult question  in  regard  to  compulsory  insurance.  Now,  Sir,  I 
do  not  desire  for  a  single  moment  to  underrate  the  difficulties  of 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  209 

compulsory  insurance,  but  I  do  not  think  that  the  right  hon.  Gentle- 
man will  find  himself  confronted  with  very  serious  opposition  from 
these  benches,  because  during  the  discussions  on  old  age  pensions 
my  hon.  Friends  here  on  this  side  of  the  House  pressed  upon  the 
Government  that  compulsory  contributions  would  be  a  reasonable 
basis  for  the  system.  We  were  told  that  there  was  something 
un-English  in  such  a  proposal  —  that  is,  the  proposal  of  compul- 
sory contribution.  Speaking  for  myself,  I  was  never  convinced  by 
that  argument,  and  I  am  unable  to  see  why  if  the  working  classes 
would  never  consent  to  a  system  of  compulsory  contributions  for 
old  age  pensions,  the  Government  are  entitled  to  suppose  that 
they  will  consent  to  compulsory  contributions  to  provide  against 
unemployment.  Speaking  for  myself,  I  am  convinced  that  the  true 
and  only  method  lies  on  the  lines  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman 
has  indicated.  I  do  not  think  that  compulsory  contribution  to  any- 
thing can  be  easily  made.  But  I  do  venture  to  think  that  the  pro- 
posal which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  has  suggested  to  the  House 
is  such  that  all  sections  of  the  House  may  unite  in  supporting  it. 
It  is  a  proposal,  whether  popular  or  unpopular,  which  will  conduce 
to  the  interests  of  the  working  classes. 


Extract  jg 

LABOUR  PARTY'S   ATTITUDE  TOWARD   UNEMPLOYMENT 

(^Mr.  Arthur  Henderson,  Coninio/is,  May  ig,  igog) 

Mr.  Henderson  ^ :  .  .  .  I  have  risen  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
a  very  general  but  a  very  hearty  welcome  to  the  statement  which 
the  President  has  made.  I  regret  exceedingly  that  the  House 
was  not  much  fuller  to  listen  to  what,  in  my  opinion,  has  been, 
so  far  as  the  great  majority  of  the  people  in  all  our  constituencies 
are  concerned,  one  of  the  most  important,  and  what  I  believe 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  5,  col.  51S  sqq. 


2IO  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

will  prove  to  be  one  of  the  most  far-reaching,  statements  which 
have  been  delivered  during  the  time  I  have  been  associated  with 
Parliament.  I  also  rejoice  at  the  statement  made  by  the  hon.  and 
learned  Member  for  the  Walton  Division  [Mr.  F.  E.  Smith].  He 
concluded  by  urging  that  this  question  should  be  kept  as  far  as 
possible  on  purely  non-party  lines.  I  think  this  is  an  excellent 
beginning,  for  there  is  no  social  question  that  touches  so  vitally 
the  condition  in  which  so  many  of  our  people  are  compelled  to 
live  as  this  great  problem  of  unemployment,  and  I  think  of  all 
questions  this  is  the  one  that  every  section  in  this  House  should 
strive  to  keep  entirely  apart  from  party  bias.  It  is  the  problem 
upon  which  we  should  centre  the  whole  of  our  attention,  in  order 
to  find  the  best  and  most  practical  remedy. 

We  on  these  Benches  may  be  pardoned  if  we  feel  slightly  grati- 
fied at  the  statement  that  the  President  has  addressed  to  the 
House.  I  think  that  statement  contains  the  germs  of  some  pro- 
posals for  which  we  have  been  striving  in  the  Labour  party  for  a 
good  many  years  past.  I  think  we  may  feel  almost  ready  to  con- 
gratulate ourselves  that  at  last  the  Government  have  made  a  begin- 
ning in  taking  out  —  I  will  put  it  in  a  very  rough  form  —  the  Right 
to  Work  Bill  in  penny  numbers.  I  know  the  President  would  not 
admit  that.  It  would  scarcely  do  for  him  to  make  such  an  admission 
having  regard  to  the  attitude  which  the  Government  have  always 
taken  up  when  this  Bill  of  ours  has  been  before  the  House,  but  I 
think  our  Bill  contained  labour  exchanges.  It  contained  a  form  of 
maintenance  in  the  absence  of  work.  I  think  our  Bill  made  some 
reference  to  insurance,  and  we  are  gratified  to  find  that  at  last  a 
beginning  is  to  be  made,  if  not  in  the  adoption  of  the  complete 
scheme,  one  which  goes  a  long  way  in  the  direction  that  we  have 
suggested  for  some  time  past. 

When  I  come  to  look  at  the  two  main  principles  which  have  been 
outlined  to  us  to-night,  I  am  personally  very  pleased  to  find  that 
the  Government  are  going  to  set  up  what  I  hope  will  be  a  com- 
plete system  of  co-ordinating  labour  exchanges.    I  am  well  aware  of 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  211 

the  objection  which  can  be  lodged  against  labour  exchanges.  They 
do  not  provide,  in  a  strict  sense,  work  for  the  unemployed.  The 
only  thing* they  do  is,  if  there  is  a  position  going,  it  does  not  ne- 
cessitate the  demoralising  tramping  system,  which,  in  my  judgment, 
has  done  more  to  reduce  the  status  of  the  workmen  of  this  coun- 
try than  anything  else  I  know  of.  I  venture  to  say  that  some  men 
have  been  compelled,  in  consequence  of  the  difficulty  of  obtaining 
information  as  to  the  condition  of  the  labour  market  in  other  dis- 
tricts than  those  in  which  they  reside,  to  begin  the  tramping  system, 
and  in  beginning  that  system  they  have  begun  the  demoralisation 
of  their  own  lives,  and  have  gone  so  far  down  that  they  have  never 
again  been  able  to  get  back  to  the  former  standard  of  their  man- 
hood. The  German  system,  which,  I  believe,  the  President  of  the 
Board  of  Trade  is  very  closely  following,  is,  in  my  judgment,  excel- 
lent, and  it  is  almost  impossible  to  describe  to  the  House  the  dif- 
ference of  the  condition  of  the  unemployed  workmen  in  Germany 
and  the  condition  that  you  find  them  in  in  this  country.  I  believe 
that  it  is  very  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  they  have  been  able  to 
remain  at  home  and  to  ascertain  the  actual  condition  of  the  labour 
market,  and  that,  if  they  have  to  move,  they  have  been  assisted 
to  move  with  their  families,  and  have  thus  been  kept  free  from 
much  of  the  demoralising  associated  with  unemployment  in  our 
own  country. 

As  to  the  second  proposal  outlined,  I  must  say  that,  whilst  I 
give  to  it  a  very  cordial  welcome,  I  regret  that  the  Government 
have  not  seen  their  way  clear  to  make  the  scheme  much  more  com- 
prehensive. What  I  fear  is  that  the  scheme  of  insurance  that  has 
been  outlined  will  be  largely  prejudiced  because  some  of  the  worst 
trades  in  our  present  recurring  periods  of  unemployment  are  not 
to  be  included.  Probably  I  may  be  answered  by  the  Government 
that  in  their  scheme  they  have  only  included  such  trades  as  enable 
them  to  get  proper  information  upon  which  to  base  the  actuarial 
cost  that  would  be  incurred.  But  the  Government  at  present  espe- 
cially should  not  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  some  of  the  trades  not 


212  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

so  highly  organised,  some  of  the  trades  which  in  days  gone  by  were 
not  so  hard  hit  by  unemployment  as  they  are  to-day,  will  feel  very 
strongly  because  they  are  left  entirely  out  of  any  provision  in  con- 
nection with  this  State  insurance  scheme.  I  should  like  to  learn  at 
the  earliest  possible  moment  —  for  I  did  not  notice  anything  in 
the  speech  of  the  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade  on  this  point  — 
whether  this  scheme  that  is  going  to  be  set  up  is  going  to  be  re- 
garded as  purely  temporary,  and  whether  there  is  going  to  be 
taken  in  the  Bill  provision  for  its  easy  extension,  provided  that 
there  is  a  desire  expressed  on  the  part  of  the  other  trades  hardly 
hit  by  unemployment  that  they  should  be  included  without  the 
necessity  of  going  through  the  very  long  delay  that  often  takes 
place  in  the  process  of  passing  another  Bill  through  both  Houses 
of  Parliament. 

Mr.  Churchill  :  I  may  state  that  the  Government  contem- 
plate taking  power  for  the  extension  of  the  system  in  the  event  of 
its  succeeding  —  after  all,  that  is  the  important  point  — •  to  other 
trades  and  industries  suitable  for  it,  provided  that  Parliament 
approves  of  that  extension  and  that  money  is  available. 

Mr.  Henderson  :  I  am  delighted  to  hear  the  statement  made 
by  the  right  hon.  Gentleman.  I  think  this  will  assist  in  modifying 
very  considerably  the  feeling  of  opposition  that  might  have  arisen 
in  connection  with  some  of  the  trades  that  are  not  for  the  moment 
included  in  the  scheme.  I  have  no  doubt  we  will  be  told  during 
subsequent  discussion  that  this  is  going  to  be  a  costly  scheme. 
Having  regard  to  the  fact  that  workmen  are  going  to  be  included 
and  will  have  to  contribute,  that  the  employers  will  have  to  con- 
tribute, and  that  the  State  itself  is  going  to  be  associated  with 
what  I  venture  to  hope  will  be  a  very  generous  contribution,  I 
have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  while  the  scheme  may  be  to  a 
certain  extent  costly,  the  cost  is  not  excessive. 

There  are  other  proposals  that  have  been  brought  before  the 
House  for  the  purpose  of  assisting  to  remedy  this  great  unem- 
ployed problem,  as  to  which  I  do  not  say  a  single  word  of  a 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  213 

controversial  character;  but  I  have  heard  it  suggested  in  this 
House  and  in  the  country  that  we  ought  to  go  in  for  a  larger  naval 
programme  in  order  to  assist  in  solving  the  unemployed  problem. 
When  I  consider  this  scheme  of  insurance  I  have  no  hesitation  in 
saying  that,  though  it  may  be  costly,  it  will  be  much  more  perma- 
nent in  character  for  good  than  any  large  scheme  or  programme 
of  armaments  for  the  purpose  of  assisting  the  solution  of  this  great 
social  problem.  We  welcome  this  scheme,  not  because  we  con- 
sider it  is  a  complete  remedy  for  this  problem.  We  welcome  it 
because  we  believe  it  is  a  beginning,  and  that  it  asserts  in  another 
form  than  that  outlined  in  our  Bill  the  recognition  by  the  State  of 
its  obligations  to  make  some  provision  for  the  relief  and  for  the 
maintenance  of  those  who  have  been  suffering  so  seriously  from 
unemployment  in  recent  years,  and  on  these  grounds  we  shall 
give  it  a  general  and  most  hearty  support.  And  our  only  regret 
is  that  the  President  has  not  seen  his  way  to  announce  to  the 
House  that  not  only  the  labour  exchange  portion  of  the  scheme 
but  the  insurance  portion  will  be  forced  through  Parliament  dur- 
ing the  present  Session. 


Extract  zfo 

LABOUR  EXCHANGES   ACT,   1909 

{g  Edw.  7,  cJi.  7) 

An  Act  to  provide  for  the  establishment  of  Labour  Exchanges  and 
for  other  purposes  incidental  thereto. 

(20th  September  1909) 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 


214  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

I.  Power  of  Board  of  Trade 

(i)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  establish  and  maintain,  in  such 
places  as  they  think  fit,  labour  exchanges,  and  may  assist  any 
labour  exchanges  maintained  by  any  other  authorities  or  persons, 
and  in  the  exercise  of  those  powers  may,  if  they  think  fit,  co- 
operate with  any  other  authorities  or  persons  having  powers  for 
the  purpose. 

(2)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  also,  by  such  other  means  as  they 
think  fit,  collect  and  furnish  information  as  to  employers  requiring 
workpeople  and  workpeople  seeking  engagement  or  employment. 

(3)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  take  over  any  labour  exchange 
(whether  established  before  or  after  the  passing  of  this  Act)  by 
agreement  with  the  authority  or  person  by  whom  the  labour  ex- 
change is  maintained,  and  any  such  authority  or  person  shall  have 
power  to  transfer  it  to  the  Board  of  Trade  for  the  purposes  of 
this  Act. 

(4)  The  powers  of  any  central  body  or  distress  committee,  and 
the  powers  of  any  council  through  a  special  committee,  to  establish 
or  maintain,  under  the  Unemployed  Workmen  Act,  1905,  a  labour 
exchange  or  employment  register  shall,  after  the  expiration  of  one 
year  from  the  commencement  of  this  Act,  not  be  exercised  except 
with  the  sanction  of,  and  subject  to  any  conditions  imposed  by,  the 
Local  Government  Board  for  England,  Scotland,  or  Ireland,  as 
the  case  may  require,  and  that  sanction  shall  not  be  given  except 
after  consultation  with  the  Board  of  Trade. 

2.  Regulations  and  Management 

(i)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  make  general  regulations  with  re- 
spect to  the  management  of  labour  exchanges  established  or  as- 
sisted under  this  Act,  and  otherwise  with  respect  to  the  exercise 
of  their  powers  under  this  Act,  and  such  regulations  may,  subject 
to  the  approval  of  the  Treasury,  authorise  advances  to  be  made  by 
way  of  loan  towards  meeting  the  expenses  of  workpeople  travelling 


THE  UNEMPLOYED  21  5 

to  places  where  employment  has  been  found  for  them  through  a 
labour  exchange. 

(2)  The  regulations  shall  provide  that  no  person  shall  suffer  any 
disqualification  or  be  otherwise  prejudiced  on  account  of  refusing 
to  accept  employment  found  for  him  through  a  labour  exchange 
where  the  ground  of  refusal  is  that  a  trade  dispute  which  affects 
his  trade  exists,  or  that  the  wages  offered  are  lower  than  those 
current  in  the  trade  in  the  district  where  the  employment  is  found. 

(3)  Any  general  regulations  made  under  this  section  shall  have 
effect  as  if  enacted  in  this  Act,  but  shall  be  laid  before  both  Houses 
of  Parliament  as  soon  as  may  be  after  they  are  made,  and,  if  either 
House  of  Parliament  within  the  next  forty  days  during  the  session 
of  Parliament  after  any  regulations  have  been  so  laid  before  that 
House  resolves  that  the  regulations  or  any  of  them  ought  to  be 
annulled,  the  regulations  or  those  to  which  the  resolution  applies 
shall,  after  the  date  of  such  resolution,  be  of  no  effect,  without 
prejudice  to  the  validity  of  anything  done  in  the  meantime  under 
the  regulations  or  to  the  making  of  any  new  regulations. 

(4)  Subject  to  any  such  regulations,  the  powers  of  the  Board 
of  Trade  under  this  Act  shall  be  exercised  in  such  manner  as  the 
Board  of  Trade  may  direct. 

(5)  The  Board  of  Trade  may,  in  such  cases  as  they  think  fit, 
establish  advisory  committees  for  the  purpose  of  giving  the  Board 
advice  and  assistance  in  connexion  with  the  management  of  any 
labour  exchange. 

J.  Penalties  for  snaking  False  Stafemenfs 

If  any  person  knowingly  makes  any  false  statement  or  false 
representation  to  any  officer  of  a  labour  exchange  established  un- 
der this  Act,  or  to  any  person  acting  for  or  for  the  purposes  of 
any  such  labour  exchange,  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  employ- 
ment or  procuring  workpeople,  that  person  shall  be  liable  in  respect 
of  each  offence  on  summary  conviction  to  a  fine  not  exceeding  ten 
pounds. 


2l6  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

4.  Expe7ises  of  the  Board  of  Trade 

The  Board  of  Trade  may  appoint  such  officers  and  servants  for 
the  purposes  of  this  Act  as  the  Board  may,  with  the  sanction  of 
the  Treasury,  determine,  and  there  shall  be  paid  out  of  moneys 
provided  by  Parliament  to  such  officers  and  servants  such  salaries 
or  remuneration  as  the  Treasury  may  determine,  and  any  expenses 
incurred  by  the  Board  of  Trade  in  carrying  this  Act  into  effect, 
including  the  payment  of  travelling  and  other  allowances  to  mem- 
bers of  advisory  committees  and  other  expenses  in  connexion  there- 
with, to  such  amount  as  may  be  sanctioned  by  the  Treasury,  shall 
be  defrayed  out  of  moneys  provided  by  Parliament. 

J".   Interpretation 

In  this  Act  the  expression  "  labour  exchange  "  means  any  office 
or  place  used  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  and  furnishing  infor- 
mation, either  by  the  keeping  of  registers  or  otherwise,  respecting 
employers  who  desire  to  engage  workpeople  and  workpeople  who 
seek  engagement  or  employment. 

6.  S/ioii  Title 
This  Act  may  be  cited  as  the  Labour  Exchanges  Act,  1909. 


CHAPTER  VI 
SWEATED   LABOUR 

[How  to  remove  the  worst  evils  resulting  from  long  hours  and 
low  wages  had  disturbed  the  minds  of  British  statesmen  for  a  long 
time.  Many  philanthropists  like  Oastler,  Hobhouse,  Sadler,  Kings- 
ley,  and  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  laboured  to  improve  the  situation  ; 
and  a  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of  Lords  made  an  elaborate 
investigation  extending  over  the  years  1888  to  1890.  The  Report 
of  this  Select  Committee,  which  aroused  a  good  deal  of  public  in- 
terest and  sympathy,  stated,  among  other  things,  that  without  being 
able  to  assign  an  exact  meaning  to  sweating,  the  evils  known  by 
that  name  were:  (i)  an  unduly  low  rate  of  wages;  (2)  excessive 
hours  of  labour ;  (3)  an  unsanitary  state  of  the  houses  in  which 
work  was  carried  on. 

The  situation  with  regard  to  low  wages  was  summed  up  by  the 
Select  Committee  as  follows  : 

It  may  be  said  that  the  inefficiency  of  the  workers,  early  marriages,  and 
the  tendency  of  the  residuum  of  the  population  in  large  towns  to  form  a 
helpless  community,  together  with  a  low  standard  of  life  and  the  excessive 
supply  of  unskilled  labour,  are  the  chief  factors  in  producing  sweating. 
Moreover,  a  large  supply  of  cheap  female  labour  is  available  by  the  fact 
that  married  women  working  at  unskilled  labour  in  their  homes,  in  the  in- 
tervals between  attending  to  their  domestic  duties,  and  not  wholly  support- 
ing themselves,  can  afford  to  work  at  what  would  be  starvation  wages  to 
unmarried  women.  Such  being  the  conditions  of  the  labour  market,  abun- 
dant materials  exist  to  supply  the  unscrupulous  employer  with  his  wretched 
dependent  workers. ^ 

1  Fifth  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of  Lords  on  the  Sweat- 
ing System  (1890),  p.  cxxxv. 

217 


2l8  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

After  the  publication  of  the  report,  an  Anti-Sweating  League 
was  formed  with  the  purpose  of  securing  the  parliamentary  enact- 
ment of  a  minimum  wage  for  workers  in  sweated  industries  and 
trades.  Prior  to  1906  several  unsuccessful  attempts  were  made  to 
prevail  upon  the  Unionist  party  to  sponsor  some  form  of  minimum 
wage  bill. 

On  February  21,  1908,  Mr.  George  Toulmin  introduced  in  the 
House  of  Commons  a  bill  designed  to  establish  wages  boards  with 
power  to  fix  the  minimum  wage  for  workers  in  certain  scheduled 
trades,  the  Home  Secretary  having  power  to  add  to  the  schedule. 
The  Boards  would  be  composed  of  representatives  of  employers 
and  employed  in  equal  numbers,  with  a  chairman  chosen  by  the 
members  or  nominated  by  the  Home  Secretary.  Payment  of  the 
minimum  wage  would  be  enforced  through  the  factory  inspectors, 
the  payment  of  less  being  punished  by  imprisonment.  Mr.  Toul- 
min gave  some  pitiable  instances  of  underpayment  and  stated 
that  a  similar  law  worked  well  in  Australia.  The  Bill  was  opposed 
by  many  Unionists,  including  Sir  F.  Banbury,  as  the  thin  end  of 
the  Socialistic  wedge,  but  it  was  accepted  in  principle  by  several 
Unionists  and  Tariff  Reformers,  including  Mr.  Lyttelton,  and  also 
by  Mr.  Herbert  Gladstone,  the  Home  Secretary,  whose  suggestion 
that  it  be  referred  to  the  Select  Committee  on  Home  Work,  was 
adopted. 

Early  in  1909  two  attempts,  independent  of  the  Government,  were 
made  to  deal  with  the  problem  of  sweating :  Mr.  H.  H.  Marks,  a 
Unionist  and  Protectionist,  unsuccessfully  moved  on  March  23  for 
leave  to  bring  in  a  bill  providing  that  when  a  minimum  rate 
of  wages  in  any  trade  had  been  established  by  law  or  custom, 
it  should  be  protected  from  the  competition  of  goods  produced 
abroad  by  sweated  or  lower-paid  labour ;  and  Mr.  Hills,  another 
Unionist,  moved  the  second  reading  of  a  bill  on  March  26  to  create 
wages  boards  of  employers  and  employed  to  fix  a  minimum  wage 
for  tailoring,  dressmaking,  shirtmaking  and  certain  other  trades,  to 
be  designated  by  the  Home  Secretary.    The  debate  on  this  Bill 


SWEATED  LABOUR  219 

was  eventually  adjourned  pending  the  debate  on  the  Government 
Bill,  which  had  been  introduced  by  Mr.  Winston  Churchill,  President 
of  the  Board  of  Trade,  on  March  24  {Extract  41),  and  which  pro- 
ceeded along  similar  lines,  save  that  the  administrative  machinery 
provided  for  in  Mr.  Churchill's  Bill  was  by  devolution  of  powers  from 
the  Board  of  Trade,  while  Mr.  Hills'  measure  began  from  below. 

The  second  reading  of  the  Government  Bill  (the  Trade  Boards 
Bill)  was  moved  by  Mr.  H.  J.  Tennant,  the  Parliamentary  Secre- 
tary to  the  Board  of  Trade,  on  April  28  {Extract  42).  He  reminded 
the  House  of  the  prevalence  of  the  evils  of  sweating  established 
by  the  Home  Work  Committee  of  1908,  and  declared  that  the 
Bill  would  apply  only  to  exceptional  industries,  unorganised,  im- 
mobile, and  carried  on  under  unhealthy  economic  conditions.  It 
was  an  experiment  and  a  revolution,  the  first  modern  proposal 
of  Government  machinery  for  settling  and  enforcing  the  rate  of 
wages.  He  called  attention  to  the  action  taken  by  Continental 
Governments,  and  thought  some  agreement  with  them  might  be 
reached.  Mr.  Lyttelton  supported  the  Bill  in  a  sympathetic  speech, 
but  with  some  reservations,  chiefly  as  to  the  powers  to  be  given  to 
the  Board  of  Trade ;  Mr.  Marks  renewed  his  effort  to  raise  the 
Tariff  Reform  issue,  and  after  other  speeches  Mr.  Balfour  insisted 
{Extract  4j)  on  certain  difficulties,  especially  that  set  up  by  for- 
eign competition,  but  supported  the  second  reading ;  to  these 
Mr.  Churchill  replied  that  other  nations  were  taking  steps  to  deal 
with  sweating,  and  that  wages  might  be  raised  without  affecting 
prices,  to  which,  indeed,  the  wages  paid  often  bore  no  relation. 
Mr.  T.  F.  Richards,  a  workingman  member  of  Parliament,  urged 
{Extract  44)  that  the  measure  be  made  more  comprehensive. 

It  may  be  added  that  the  Bill  went  to  a  Standing  Committee, 
and  was  reported  to  the  House  and  read  a  third  time  on  July  16. 
A  Labour  attempt  was  made  unsuccessfully  to  provide  for  the  in- 
clusion of  other  trades  besides  those  scheduled ;  and  the  foreign 
competition  question  was  again  raised  vinsuccessfully  by  Mr.  H.  H. 
Marks,    The  Bill  was  extended  by  a  provision  that  an  employer 


220  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

convicted  of  paying  wages  below  the  minimum  rate  might  also  be 
ordered  to  make  up  the  deficient  wages ;  and  a  clause  relating  to 
sub-contracting  was  dropped.  In  the  House  of  Lords,  the  Bill 
passed  second  reading  on  August  30  and  third  reading  on  Septem- 
ber 20  ;  on  the  former  occasion,  Lord  Hamilton  of  Dalzell  ex- 
pressed the  Government  view  (^Extract  4^)  and  the  Marquess  of 
Salisbury  that  of  the  Opposition  (^Extract  46).  Royal  assent  was 
accorded  the  Bill  on  October  20. 

The  Bill,  enacted  as  the  Trade  Boards  Act,  1909,  is  Extract  4/.] 


Extract  41 

INTRODUCTION  OF  THE  TRADE  BOARDS  BILL 

{Air.  Winston  Chiirchilt^  Preside7it  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  Conu/tons, 
A f arch  24,  igog;  Sir  Frederick  Banbiny,  ibid.) 

Mr.  Churchill  ^ :  .  .  .  The  central  principle  of  the  Trade 
Boards  Bill  is  the  establishment  of  Trade  Boards  in  certain  trades 
where  the  evils  known  as  sweating  prevail,  and  the  fixing  by  those 
particular  Boards  of  a  minimum  standard  of  wages,  and  the  en- 
forcement by  those  Trade  Boards  of  that  minimum  when  fixed. 

The  Trade  Boards  set  up  under  this  Bill  will  exercise  other 
functions  besides  their  particular  statutory  functions  of  fixing  a 
minimum  rate  of  wages.  They  will  be  a  centre  of  information, 
and  I  hope  they  will  become  the  foci  of  organisation.  As  centres 
of  information  they  may  as  time  goes  on  be  charged  with  some 
other  aspects  of  the  administration  of  the  work  of  the  trades,  with 
the  question  of  the  training  of  the  workers,  and  also  they  will  be 
able  to  afford  information  upon  the  subject  of  unemployment. 
They  will  generally  be  not  merely  boards  for  the  purpose  of  fixing 
the  minimum  rate  of  wages,  for  that  is  their  primary  purpose,  but 
boards  designed  to  nourish,  as  far  as  possible,  the  interests  of  the 

1  Parliarnentaiy  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series^  vol.  2,  col.  1787  sq(j. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  221 

workers,  the  health,  and  the  state  of  the  industry  of  each  particular 
trade  in  which  they  operate. 

The  trades  which  will  be  scheduled  under  the  Bill,  and  to  which 
the  Bill  will  at  once  apply,  are  these :  the  tailoring  trade,  —  but  let 
me  say  that  after  very  careful  examination  we  have  arrived  at  a 
correct  definition  of  those  portions  of  the  tailoring  trade  to  which 
the  Act  should  apply,  that  is,  the  ready-made  and  wholesale  be- 
spoke, —  the  trade  of  cardboard-box  making,  machine-made-lace 
and  finishing  trade,  and  the  ready-made-blouse-making  trade. 
Those  are  the  trades  that  are  scheduled  under  the  Bill  for  a 
beginning ;  but  power  is  taken  in  the  Bill  to  extend  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Bill  to  other  trades  by  an  Order  which  acquires 
validity  when  it  has  lain  on  the  table  of  the  House  unchallenged 
for  thirty  days.    So  much  for  the  scope  of  the  Bill. 

There  are  two  methods  by  which  Trade  Boards  may  be  called 
into  being.  You  may  make  local  Trade  Boards  in  the  different  dis- 
tricts. Then  you  may  federate  all  those  Trade  Boards  and  form  a 
Central  Council ;  or,  on  the  other  hand,  you  can  have  a  Trade  Board 
which  would  give  the  duties  and  power  to  local  Trade  Boards  or 
local  committees,  which  are  set  up  in  the  particular  districts  by 
the  trade.  Having  to  choose  between  the  principle  of  devolution 
and  federation  of  local  bodies  into  a  central  body,  we  have  chosen 
devolution  from  the  central  body.  It  is  of  very  great  importance 
that  the  balance  should  be  held  evenly  between  one  district  and 
another  in  some  of  those  trades.  Therefore,  I  felt  any  assistance 
of  this  character  must  be  gripped  and  co-ordinated  strictly  from 
the  centre  in  each  trade. 

The  Trade  Board,  having  been  formed  in  any  trade,  establishes 
a  district  trade  committee.  The  district  trade  committee  will  con- 
sist of  local  representatives  of  the  employers  and  of  the  work- 
men, and  a  proportionate  number  of  the  Central  Trade  Board. 
The  Trade  Board  itself  will  also  be  composed  of  the  representa- 
tives of  the  employers  and  of  the  workers,  and  the  Trade  Board 
in  any  trade  will  have  three  expert  paid  official  members,  salaried 


222  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

official  members,  and,  I  trust,  where  women  are  largely  employed, 
at  least  one  of  those  members  shall  always  be  a  woman.  Those 
official  members  are  the  link  we  are  relying  on  to  couple  together 
and  strengthen  the  local  organisations  and  to  procure,  with  a  gen- 
eral view  to  that  haiTnony  of  action  which  is  essential,  that  the 
provisions  of  this  Bill  are  really  to  be  useful  and  effective.  The 
official  members  of  the  Central  Trade  Boards  will  also  be  mem- 
bers of  the  district  trade  committees,  and  the  official  member  of 
the  district  trade  committee  will  occupy  the  chair  whenever  that 
committee  meets. 

Great  latitude  is  taken' by  the  Board  of  Trade  in  regard  to  the 
processes  by  which  those  Trade  Boards  are  called  into  existence. 
We  give  power  by  any  method  —  by  election,  and  where  the  ma- 
terials for  election  do  not  exist,  and  those  who  have  studied  this 
question  know  that  in  many  cases  they  do  not  exist,  we  take  the 
power  to  proceed  ...   as  circumstances  may  direct.   .   .   . 

The  Bill  applies,  indeed  is  indispensable,  not  only  to  home 
workers,  but  to  factory  workers,  and  that  is  obviously  necessary. 
To  screw  up  by  those  special  and  artificial  means  the  position  of 
the  home  worker,  while  leaving  the  factory  untouched,  would  be 
to  improve  the  lot  of  the  home  worker  by  a  process  which  in  prac- 
tice would  be  very  harsh.  The  Bill  allows  the  different  treatment 
to  be  applied  simultaneously  to  the  home  workers  and  factory 
workers  in  any  district.  A  minimum  time-rate  v/ill  be  the  general 
basis,  and  to  that  minimum  time-rate  all  piece-rates  will  be  referred. 
It  will  be  open  to  the  Trade  Boards  to  fix  the  general  minimum 
piece-rates  in  regard  to  articles  more  or  less  standard  in  their  char- 
acter and  regularly  produced.  It  will  be  open  to  an  employer  to  go 
to  the  Trade  Board  and  ask  for  a  special  minimum  in  regard  to 
any  special  class  of  work  he  has  on  hand.  It  will  be  open  for  the 
Trade  Board  to  fix  different  piece-rates  and  in  some  cases  different 
time-rates  for  the  whole  of  the  factor)'  workers  in  any  particular 
district.  All  these  rates  will  be  co-ordinated  as  between  district  and 
district  by  the  general  division  of  the  Trade  Board, 


SWEATED  LABOUR  223 

Now,  I  have  dealt  with  the  scope,  and  I  have  dealt  with  the 
machinery,  and  I  propose  to  deal  with  the  procedure.  The  dis- 
trict trade  committee  —  that  is,  the  local  body  in  session,  with 
its  official  members  —  recognises  minimum  time  piece-rates.  The 
Trade  Board  of  the  whole  trade  considers  those  in  all  their  bear- 
ings from  a  central  point  of  view,  and,  after  an  interval  to  hear 
objections,  amends,  approves,  and  finally  prescribes.  Thereupon 
the  minimum,  when  prescribed  by  the  Trade  Board,  will  become 
obligatory  on  Government  and  municipal  contractors,  and  in  all 
cases  the  wages  specified  are  recoverable  as  a  civil  debt  in  the 
absence  of  a  written  contract  to  the  contrary.  The  rates  will  be 
posted  in  a  manner  similar  to  the  notices  under  the  Factory  Acts, 
and  a  white  list,  accessible  to  the  public,  will  be  formed  of  manu- 
facturers voluntarily  agreeing  to  be  bound  under  penalties  to  ob- 
serve the  minimum  rate.  No  one  who  does  not  appear  on  that 
list  will  be  eligible  for  any  Government  contract. 

By  such  methods  it  is  hoped  by  the  Board  of  Trade,  and  sorrte 
who  have  studied  the  question,  that  there  will  be  in  the  first  instance 
a  healthy  trade  opinion  from  the  beginning,  and  that,  beginning,  an 
organisation  will  be  formed  which,  with  a  certain  backing  of  solid 
support  within  the  trade  committees,  will  act  on  the  state  of  min- 
imum wage  which  we  are  anxious  to  enforce.  At  any  time  not 
less  than  six  months  after  the  minimum  rates  have  been  prescribed, 
the  Board  of  Trade  may,  on  the  application  of  the  Trade  Board, 
make  an  order,  making  those  rates  obligatory  by  law  on  all  per- 
sons. It  may  then  use,  to  enforce  the  rates,  the  powers  which  we 
are  going  to  ask  Parliament  to  confer  upon  us  by  the  Act.  I  say 
at  the  outset  that  the  enforcement  will  be  effective  in  proportion 
as  there  is  a  strong  element  of  support  among  the  workers  and 
among  the  employers  in  the  trade  committees.  But  it  is  also 
necessary,  and  I  could  not  be  responsible  for  the  Act  without 
that  necessity  being  made,  that  full  powers  of  enforcement,  not 
only  by  investigation  and  complaint,  but  also  by  inspection,  should 
rest  in  the  hands  of  the  authorities  who  administer  the  Act.   The 


224  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

use  of  such  powers  must  depend  upon  the  circumstances  of  each 
particular  varying  trade  and  on  each  particular  varying  district, 
but  that  those  powers  should  be  made  in  the  Act  is  in  our 
judgment  essential. 

I  therefore  take  powers  which  authorise  entry  to  factories, 
to  workshops  and  places  where  work  is  being  carried  on,  at  all 
reasonable  and  suitable  times.  The  powers  which  the  Act  confers 
provide  for  investigation  of  the  complaints  by  a  thoroughly  efficient 
system  of  inspection  by  officers  who  will  devote  their  whole  time 
to  the  work  and  who  will  be  appointed  with  the  sanction  of  the 
Board  of  Trade  to  work  under  Trade  Boards  in  each  particular 
trade  and  under  the  local  committees  in  each  particular  district. 
Arrangements  are  made  in  the  Bill  to  utilise  the  services  of  the 
factory  inspectors  of  the  Home  Office,  who  are  also  engaged  in 
covering  ground  not  far  removed  from  that  which  we  are  now 
entering.  In  order  that  we  may  not  have  to  come  to  Parliament 
again  for  the  fullest  power  to  give  effect  to  these  proposals  by 
clauses  in  the  Bill,  we  ask  the  House  to  enable  the  powers  which 
the  Board  of  Trade  have  under  this  Act  to  be  transferred  if 
necessary  to  the  Home  Office  for  administration  by  the  Home 
Office.  That  gets  over  any  difficulty  of  a  subsequent  demand 
upon  Parliament  for  further  powers  and  places  in  the  hands  of 
the  authorities  many  channels  through  which  to  enforce  the  Act, 
and  the  power  of  choosing  from  a  variety  of  measures  that  which 
will  attain  the  most  favourable  result. 

I  have  now  unfolded  the  main  outlines  of  the  Bill.  The  prin- 
ciples on  which  we  are  proceeding  are  to  endeavour  to  foster 
organisation  in  trades  in  which,  by  reason  of  the  prevalence  of 
exceptionally  evil  conditions,  no  organisation  has  yet  taken  root, 
and  in  which,  in  consequence,  no  parity  of  bargaining  power  can 
be  said  to  exist ;  to  use  these  organisations,  when  formed,  as 
instruments  to  determine  minimum  standards  below  which  the 
wages  paid  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  fall ;  to  rally  to  the  side 
of  these  minimum  standards  all  the  healthy  elements  in  the  trade ; 


SWEATED  LABOUR  225 

and,  finally,  if  and  when  this  has  been  achieved,  to  protect  the 
good  employers  —  and  there  are  always  good  employers  in  the 
worst  of  trades  —  who  are  anxious  to  pay  a  proper  rate  of  wages 
from  being  undercut,  and  to  protect  them  by  compulsory  powers 
which  are  no  doubt  far-reaching  in  their  character,  which  I  also 
think  will  be  found  to  be  properly  safeguarded  in  their  use.  I 
hope  the  House  will  now  accord  me  permission  to  introduce  the 
Bill.  The  difficulties  which  confront  those  who  attempt  to  deal 
with  these  questions  are  no  doubt  great ;  but  there  is  a  very  large 
measure  of  sympathy  and  interest  in  such  efforts,  not  by  any 
means  confined  to  one  side  or  one  quarter  of  the  House,  and  I 
am  confident  that  Parliament  will  not  grudge  the  time  and  labour 
which  the  consideration  of  these  questions  and  the  attempt  to 
legislate  upon  them  will  most  certainly  require. 

Mr.  Speaker  :  The  question  is  that  leave  be  given  to  bring  in 
the  Bill.    Does  any  Member  rise  to  oppose  ? 

Sir  Frederick  Banbury  :  Yes,  Sir  ;  certainly.  The  right  hon. 
Gentleman  has  given  utterance  to  some  elaborate  sentences  to 
explain  the  principles  which  actuated  His  Majesty's  Government 
in  introducing  this  Bill.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  might  have 
saved  the  time  of  the  House,  and  made  his  position  more  clear, 
if  he  had  said  that  the  principles  which  actuated  His  Majesty's 
Government  were  to  be  found  in  a  complete  surrender  to  the 
Socialist  party.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  told  us  that  the  object 
of  his  Bill  —  and  I  call  the  attention  of  the  hon.  Member  for 
Preston  to  this  —  is  to  screw  up  by  artificial  methods  the  posi- 
tion of  the  worker.  And  he  also  said  something  about  power  to 
protect  the  worker  and  about  fixing  the  minimum  wages,  and 
finished  up  by  saying,  "  So  much  for  the  scope  of  the  Bill."  I 
think  the  scope  is  very  large,  because,  as  I  understand,  there  is 
not  a  single  trade  in  the  country  which  may  not  be  brought  within 
the  provisions  of  the  Bill.  It  seems  that  one  effect  of  this  Bill  will 
be  to  provide  employment  for  certain  people  at  the  expense  of 
the  State  at  a  time  when  the  finances  of  the  State  are  as  bad  as 


226  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

they  can  possibly  be ;  another  will  be  to  put  a  final  nail  in  the 
coffin  of  the  trade  of  this  country.  [Laughter.]  Hon.  Members 
laugh.  D6  they  suppose  that  people  here  in  England  will  be  able 
to  cope  with  all  the  provisions  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  has 
indicated  ?  Are  they  aware  that  employers  abroad  are  not  ham- 
pered by  any  of  these  restrictions  which  it  is  sought  to  impose 
upon  employers  in  this  country  ?  The  result  will  be  that  the  few 
remaining  trades  in  this  country —  [Laughter.]  I  do  not  con- 
sider this  a  laughing  matter.  I  think  the  position  of  this  country 
is  extremely  grave,  not  only  in  regard  to  its  trade,  but  in  regard 
also  to  many  other  matters.  I  cannot  admit  that  it  is  a  laughing 
matter  to  interfere  with  the  trade  of  the  country.  It  may  be  right, 
or  it  may  be  wrong,  but  it  is  a  serious  question,  and  one  which 
will  have  to  be  dealt  with  with  gravity,  even  in  this  House  of 
Commons. 


Extract  42 

SECOND  READING  OF  THE  TRADE  BOARDS  BILL 

(il/r.  H.  J.  Tennant^  Parliafnentary  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Trade, 
Comtnotis,  Aptil  28,  iQog) 

Mr.  Tennant^:  It  is  a  singular  coincidence  that  on  April  28, 
1890,  exactly  nineteen  years  ago  to  this  da\',  the  Select  Committee 
of  the  House  of  Lords,  called  Lord  Dunraven's  Committee,  made 
a  Report.  That  Committee  sat  over  a  long  period,  and  examined 
no  less  than  291  witnesses.  It  reported  that  sweating  had  been 
known  for  fifty  years.  It  referred  to  "  a  rate  of  wages  inadequate 
to  the  necessities  of  the  workers  or  disproportionate  to  the  work 
done."  It  reported  that  the  state  of  things  which  existed  involved 
excessive  hours  of  labour  and  insanitary  state  of  houses.  The 
Committee  also  said : 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  342  sqq. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  22/ 

These  evils  can  hardly  be  exaggerated.  The  earnings  of  the  lowest 
classes  of  workers  are  barely  sufficient  to  sustain  existence.  The  hours  of 
labour  are  such  as  to  make  the  lives  of  the  workers  periods  of  almost 
ceaseless  toil,  hard  and  often  unhealthy. 

The  Committee  concfuded  with  the  impressive  remark : 

We  make  these  statements  on  evidence  of  the  truth  of  which  we  are 
fully  satisfied,  and  we  feel  bound  to  express  our  admiration  of  the  courage 
with  which  the  sufferers  endure  their  lot,  of  the  absence  of  any  desire  to 
excite  pity  by  exaggeration,  and  of  the  almost  unbounded  charity  they  dis- 
play towards  each  other  in  endeavouring  by  gifts  of  food  and  other  kind- 
nesses to  alleviate  any  distress  for  the  time  being  greater  than  their  own. 

All,  or  nearly  all,  of  the  recommendations  of  that  Committee 
have  been  embodied  in  new  legislation.  Has  there  been  any  con- 
siderable improvement  in  the  interval  ?  Let  us  hope  that  there  has. 
Miss  Squire,  a  very  competent  inspector  of  factories,  says  that  the 
conditions  have  been  largely  improved  since  that  Committee  sat, 
but  in  spite  of  this  and  of  the  great  prosperity  enjoyed  by  the 
bulk  of  the  nation,  the  Home  Work  Committee  reported  last  year 
that  there  was  "  no  doubt  whatever  that  the  number  of  sweated 
individuals  is  very  large,  and  that  it  is  still  true  that  the  evils  of 
sweating  are  very  great."    That  Committee  also  reported : 

The  earnings  of  a  large  number  of  people  are  so  small  as  alone  to  be 
insufficient  to  sustain  life  in  a  most  meagre  manner,  even  when  the  work- 
ers toil  hard  for  extremely  long  hours,  that  the  conditions  under  which 
they  live  are  altogether  pitiable  and  distressing,  and  that  sufficient  evi- 
dence has  been  put  before  us  to  show  that  sweating  still  exists  to  such  a 
degree  as  to  call  urgently  for  the  interference  of  Parliament. 

The  Bill  which  I  am  now  asking  the  House  to  read  a  second 
time  is  an  attempt  to  deal  with  these  conditions  of  labour.  The 
principle  of  this  legislation  was  introduced  to  this  House  by  my 
right  hon.  Friend  the  Member  for  the  Forest  of  Dean  [Sir  Charles 
Dilke],  who  has  been  the  author  of  so  many  schemes  for  social 
progress.  May  I  felicitate  him  on  the  important  stage  which  has 
been  reached  now  by  a  measure  which  I  know  is  near  his  heart. 


228  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

It  is  a  pleasure  to  me  to  reflect  that  I  have  been  associated  with 
him  from  the  beginning  in  this  legislation  —  in  this  and  many  other 
endeavours  in  the  direction  of  industrial  improvement.  .  .   . 

Our  remedy  is  only  intended  to  apply  to  a  very  limited  extent. 
It  is  a  remedy  which  has  reference  to  low  wages,  and  does  not  deal 
with  the  question  whether  State  action  can,  or  ought  to,  control 
wages.  The  general  rates  of  wages  throughout  the  country  will  be 
settled  by  other  means  than  this  Bill  —  that  is,  by  economic  forces. 
It  is  generally  accepted  that  State  interference  with  the  remunera- 
tion for  labour  can  only  be  justified  in  exceptional  cases  where  two 
fundamental  conditions  are  absent  —  I  mean  the  mobility  of  labour 
in  its  true  sense  and  effective  organisation.  It  is  only  in  those  two 
cases  that  we  propose  to  apply  this  legislation.  Indeed,  the  appli- 
cation of  this  measure  is  very  limited.  It  is  intended  to  be  applied 
exclusively  to  exceptionally  unhealthy  patches  of  the  body  politic 
where  the  development  has  been  arrested  in  spite  of  the  growth  of 
the  rest  of  the  organism.  It  is  to  the  morbid  and  diseased  places 
—  to  the  industrial  diphtheritic  spots  —  that  we  should  apply  the 
antitoxin  of  Trade  Boards. 

Incidentally,  may  I  say,  that  these  spots  are  not  peculiar  to  this 
country.  The  same  evils  exist  in  other  industrial  countries— P'rance, 
Germany,  Austria,  and  the  United  States  of  America.  The  House 
will  be  familiar  with  the  theory  and  practice  of  the  pocket-money 
wage  earner.  A  girl  may  wish  to  have  a  little  work  to  do,  although 
she  may  possibly  live  in  a  very  comfortable  home.  Wages  with  her 
are  not  the  primary  consideration.  She  simply  wants  to  supplement 
her  income,  and  she  is  not  particular  as  to  the  rate  of  wages  that 
she  may  get.  Thus  we  have  the  paradox  that  the  same  result  is 
achieved  by  the  ignorant  whim  of  the  comparatively  well-to-do  per- 
son and  by  the  dire  necessity  of  the  starving.  Both  accept  work 
at  sweated  rates,  and  the  result  is  sweated  trade.  The  trade  be- 
comes a  parasitic  trade,  feeding  upon  other  industries  and  trades  in 
the  country  and  on  the  wealth  of  the  nation,  for  in  such  a  case  the 
wages  bill  of  the  sweated  industry  is  largely  paid  by  the  relatives 


SWEATED  LABOUR  229 

with  whom  the  worker  lives,  by  the  poor  law,  by  the  community 
who  subscribe  to  hospitals  and  asylums,  by  charity,  and  by  a  pro- 
portion of  the  cost  of  old  age  pensions.  I  think  I  may  say  that 
such  a  trade  is  a  parasitic  trade,  when  we  hear  the  argument,  "  Is 
it  not  better  that  you  should  give  the  girl  some  work  rather  than 
no  work  —  that  she  should  be  sweated  rather  than  starved  ?  "  To 
that  I  reply,  "  No,  a  hundred  times  No."  In  the  first  place  the 
argument  is  false,  because  starvation  is  not  an  alternative,  but 
usually  an  accompaniment  of  sweating,  and  I  agree  with  the  witness 
who  gave  evidence  before  the  Royal  Commission  on  Labour,  that 
it  is  easier  to  starve  without  the  work.  One  of  the  best  results  of 
this  Bill  will  be  the  recognition  of  the  inefficient  and  unemployable 
by  the  State.  It  is  far  more  humane,  far  safer,  and  far  cheaper 
that  the  nation  should  recognise  and  deal  with  these  sweated 
workers.  If  the  girl  is  sweated,  rather  than  go  to  the  poor  law 
she  drags  others  down  with  her  into  this  industrial  abyss. 

It  is  to  combat  these  evils  that  we  are  introducing  this  Bill.  It 
is  at  once  an  experiment  and  a  revolution  —  a  new  step  in  the 
social  progress.  These  conditions  .which  are  now  familiar  to  the 
House  demand  drastic  treatment  and,  therefore,  I  feel  that  no 
apology  will  be  expected  of  me  because  we  are  introducing  a 
drastic  measure.  Parliament,  quite  two  generations  ago,  enacted 
that  payment  of  wages  should  take  place  in  the  coin  of  the  realm. 
Parliament  has  also  decreed  that  Government  contractors  shall  pay 
a  definite  and  standard  rate  of  wages,  and  great  authorities  like 
the  London  County  Council  have  decided  that  their  contractors 
must  pay  a  minimum  rate  of  wages.  This  is  the  first  occasion, 
certainly  in  modern  Parliamentary  times,  in  which  any  Govern- 
ment has  proposed  machinery,  first  for  deciding,  and  secondly  for 
enforcing,  a  legal  rate  of  wages.  To  that  extent  the  proposal  is 
new  —  to  that  extent  the  proposal  is  a  revolution. 

Now,  may  I  address  myself  to  the  hon.  Baronet  the  Member 
for  the  City  of  London,  who  said  that  such  a  Bill  as  this  is  going 
to  alter  the  whole  system  on  which  the  fabric  of  British  trade  has 


230  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

been  built  up.  He  says  it  is  going  to  do  little  or  not  much  good 
to  the  workers.  Now  I  assume  that  the  argument  is  based  on  the 
assumption  that  if  you  raise  the  rate  of  wages,  you  necessarily 
increase  prices.  I  should  like  to  quote  an  extract  from  an  interest- 
ing Report  written  by  Mr.  Ernest  Aves  (quoted  in  the  Report  of 
the  Home  Work  Committee).    He  says : 

Some  of  the  fallacies,  mainly  traceable  to  an  assumed  fixity  in  the 
determining  conditions  —  personal  and  economic  —  which  underlie  this 
assumption  in  its  application  to  certain  industries  are  recalled  by  Victorian 
experience,  and  the  extent  to  which  the  combined  view  is  held  that  special 
boards  have  increased  wages  and  have  not  increased  cost  is  of  practical 
significance,  since  it  is  found  to  prevail  in  several  of  those  trades  in  which 
the  evil  of  underpayment  is  apt  to  be  most  prevalent.  The  special  boards 
themselves  may  or  may  not  have  sent  wages  up  to  the  extent  often  as- 
sumed or  even  at  all.  The  fact  remains  that  in  several  trades  in  which 
wages  have  tended  upwards  there  is  much  testimony  to  the  fact  that 
neither  cost  nor  price  have  been  similarly  affected,  and  in  some  instances 
it  has  been  admitted  that  they  have  tended  in  the  opposite  direction. 

I  have  expressly  avoided  dealing  with  the  Australian  experiment 
because  I  am  perfectly  aware  that  the  conditions  in  this  country 
are  so  entirely  different  from  those  in  Victoria ;  but  I  do  think 
I  am  entitled  to  say,  at  any  rate,  that  it  has  been  proved  that 
the  assumption  that  invariably  and  inevitably  an  increase  of  prices 
must  take  place  with  an  increase  of  wages  is  not  a  fact.  Well, 
again,  I  should  like  to  remind  the  House  that  an  increase  of 
wages  brings  increased  efficiency,  and  increased  efficiency  brings 
an  increase  not  only  in  quality  but  in  quantity.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  it  further  stimulates  resource  on  the  part  of  manufacturers 
and  the  inventive  genius  of  the  people  who  give  their  minds  to 
mechanics. 

Sir  Frederick  Banbury  :  As  the  hon.  Gentleman  has  referred 
to  me,  I  should  like  to  say  that  I  never  stated  that  an  increase  of 
wages  must  be  accompanied  by  an  increase  of  price.  What  I  said 
was  that  unless  an  increase  of  wages  was  accompanied  by  an 
increase  of  price,  an  industry  might  disappear. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  231 

Mr.  Tennant  :  I  am  endeavouring  to  show  there  are  many 
things  upon  which  an' industry  can  draw  before  it  becomes  extinct. 
The  Home  Work  Committee  found  material  difference  existing  in 
the  rates  usually  paid  by  different  employers  in  the  same  town  at 
the  same  moment  for  the  same  work.  Again,  I  would  like  to 
remind  the  House  that  high  wages  do  not  carry  with  them  high 
prices.  That  is  proved  by  the  sweated  trades.  Certainly  low  wages 
do  not  necessarily  carry  with  them  low  prices.  That  was  certainly 
proved  in  the  cotton  and  the  iron  and  steel  trades  of  this  country, 
where  you  have  in  many  cases  existing  minimum  rates  of  wages 
which  have  not  been  found  to  raise  prices.  Furthermore,  there  are 
certain  profits  of  the  middleman  —  exorbitant  profits,  as  some  of 
us  think  —  which  will  disappear.  Trade  Boards  in  their  establish- 
ment will  bring  together  not  only  the  workpeople  but  the  employers. 
They  may  possibly  find  it  convenient  to  make  arrangements  —  they 
may,  at  any  rate,  have  a  chance  to  make  arrangements  —  by  which 
they  will  be  able  to  avoid  some  of  the  very  violent  competition 
which  they  now  wage  against  each  other,  and  they  may  be  able  to 
effect  considerable  economy.  It  may  also  be  urged  that  they  will 
also  endeavour  to  raise  prices.  If  they  do  so  they  will  only  do  it 
temporarily,  because  there  is  sufficient  capital  to  set  up  new  facto- 
ries or  workshops,  and  that  will  soon  bring  back  prices  to  their 
old  level. 

I  think  I  have  demonstrated  that  the  experience  which  we  have, 
at  any  rate,  has  shown  that  normally  a  rise  of  wages  does  not  bring 
about  a  rise  in  price.  It  is  ridiculous  to  assume  that  a  rise  in  wages 
must  bring  about  an  increase  in  price.  But  suppose  it  does,  let  us 
imagine  what  will  be  the  result.  Will  the  worker  be  harmed  by  a 
reduced  demand  for  a  dearer  article  ?  Unless  the  decrease  in  the 
demand  is  very  great,  I  say  this,  with  great  conviction,  that  it 
would  be  better  that  the  worker  should  be  employed  on  a  lesser 
demand,  with  reasonable  hours  of  work  at  a  fair  rate  of  wages, 
than  on  a  great  demand  with  long  hours  at  sweated  rates  of  wages. 
[Ironical  cheers.]     I  suppose  what  is  running  in  the  minds  of  the 


232  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

hon.  Gentlemen  who  cheer  is  that  you  are  going  to  invite  for- 
eign competition  from  abroad.  [An  Hon.  Member  :  That  is  it.] 
Then  I  say  to  those  hon.  Gentlemen  who  cheer,  remember  that 
these  Trade  Boards  are  composed  of  the  best  representatives  of  the 
trades  that  the  Board  of  Trade  can  find,  and  they  will  be  and  ought 
to  be  the  guardians  of  the  interests  of  the  trade,  as  they  are  both 
employers  and  employees,  dependent  upon  the  prosperity  of  the 
trade.  Look  at  the  great  staple  industries,  I  say,  again.  Look  at 
the  cotton  trade,  where  the  wages  are  highest.  They  compete 
against  the  same  trade  in  India  and  Japan,  where  the  wages  are 
lowest,  and  they  are  not  afraid  of  foreign  competition.  They  have 
never  found  it  difficult  to  compete  against  India  and  Japan  in  the 
neutral  markets  of  the  world. 

•  But  let  us  consider  what  other  nations  are  doing.  For  instance, 
take  Germany.  Germany  has  an  elaborate  Factory  Code,  and  she 
held  an  exhibition  in  Berlin  similar  in  character  to  our  Sweated 
Industries  Exhibition.  There  is  at  the  present  moment  a  Committee 
of  the  Reichstag  considering  the  further  limitation  of  home  work, 
and  it  is  proposed  to  empower  the  Federal  Council,  and  also  the 
local  police,  to  make  rules  requiring  all  home  workers  to  be  fur- 
nished with  a  wage-book,  or  labour  ticket,  and  to  see  that  in  every 
room  in  which  home  work  is  carried  on  there  should  be  posted 
a  statement  of  the  wages  to  which  each  worker  is  entitled.  The 
Governments  of  Bavaria  and  Baden  have  recently  made  investiga- 
tions into  these  industries  through  their  factory  inspectors,  and  the 
reports  which  have  been  published  as  a  result  contain  various 
recommendations  as  to  their  legal  regulation.  The  measures  sug- 
gested by  the  Bavarian  Report  (1907)  include  :  (i)  the  obligation  to 
employ  wage-books  or  tickets  ;  (2)  the  extension  to  all  home  workers 
of  the  insurance  laws  ;  (3)  obligatory  registration  ;  (4)  the  fixing  of 
minimum  rates  of  wages  with  allowances  for  rent,  light,  heating, 
and  time  lost  in  fetching  and  delivering  work  ;  (5)  inspection  of  the 
dwellings  used  for  domestic  industry.  That  is  beyond  any  proposals 
that  we  offer  by  Bill,  and  those  are  the  proposals  of  Germany. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  233 

Austria  is  also  making  certain  proposals,  which  I  have  not  time 
to  go  into,  but  there  was  held  in  1906  a  conference  under  the 
auspices  of  the  International  Association  for  Labour  Legislation 
at  Geneva,  where  certain  resolutions  were  passed  in  regard  to 
the  social  conditions  of  home  workers,  the  industrial  condition  of 
workers  in  Europe  having  regard  to  the  competition  with  foreign 
nations,  and  the  finding  of  a  legislative  remedy.  Arising  out  of 
that  meeting  there  has  been  held,  in  conformity  with  the  resolution 
passed  at  Geneva,  an  inquiry  in  France  in  regard  to  what  is  called 
the  French  lingerie  trade,  which  is  famous  all  over  the  world  and 
very  expensive.  That  inquiry  has  elicited  the  fact  that  56  per  cent 
of  the  home  workers  in  this  white  lingerie  trade  work  an  average 
of  more  than  ten  hours  a  day,  at  rates  of  pay  not  exceeding  i  id. 
an  hour,  and  50  per  cent  of  them  have  net  earnings  of  less  than 
;^i6  per  annum. 

I  think  I  have  said  enough  to  show  that  public  conscience  on 
the  Continent  of  Europe  has  been  aroused  with  regard  to  the  evils 
of  the  sweating  system,  and  it  will  not  be  very  difificult  for  us  to  ar- 
rive at  an  agreement  with  foreign  nations  similar  to  that  which  has 
recently  been  carried  out  in  the  Bill  of  last  year  for  the  prohibition 
of  the  importation  or  use  of  white  phosphorus  in  matches.  If  prices 
are  not  raised,  it  leaves  me  free  to  assert  that  competition  in  the 
markets  of  the  world  is  an  unreal  and  negligible  bogey,  and  what 
objection  have  hon.  Gentlemen  then  to  this  legislation  ?  Is  it  going 
to  be  asserted,  as  I  have  heard  it  asserted,  that  it  will  be  so  dififi- 
cult  to  enforce  that  enforcement  will  be  impossible,  and  evasion 
will  be  the  rule  rather  than  the  exception  ?  I  think  that  argument 
implies  want  of  grasp  of  the  principle  which  underlies  this  Bill, 
and  that  is,  that  the  determinations  are  not  going  to  be  exagger- 
ated beyond  what  the  trade  will  bear  by  those  who  are  dependent 
upon  the  trade  for  a  livelihood.  The  decisions  of  the  Trade  Boards 
will  be  in  harmony  with  and  representative  of  trade  opinion.  I  will 
ask  the  House  whether  evasion  is  a  reason  for  inaction.  We  know 
that  new  principles  have  been  carried  out  in  the  law  of  this  country 


234  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

in  regard  to  work  and  wages.  The  provisions  as  to  particulars 
and  truck  are  evaded  to  a  great  extent  and  to  an  injurious  degree, 
but  I  am  sure  that  hon.  Members  below  the  gangway  will  bear 
me  out  when  I  say  that  enormous  good  has  resulted  from  those 
enactments,  and  are  we  going  to  deny  the  indubitable  benefits  of 
this  legislation  simply  because  we  are  afraid  that  for  some  of  those 
who  are  most  in  need  of  it  our  intentions  may  be  frustrated  ?  I 
cannot  help  thinking  that  that  is  not  good  argument. 

There  are  certain  criticisms  which  have  been  made  upon  the 
details  of  this  legislation.  They  are  largely  Committee  points,  but 
there  are  one  or  two  which  I  think  I  ought  to  advert  to.  The  hon. 
Member  for  Durham  said  that  he  objects  to  the  centralising  organi- 
sation embodied  in  the  Bill,  and  my  right  hon.  Friend  the  Member 
for  the  Spen  Valley  said  it  was  doubtful  policy  to  appoint  commit- 
tees throughout  the  country  and  co-ordinate  the  whole.  I  say  that, 
after  all,  this  Bill  carries  all  that  my  right  hon.  Friend  the  Mem- 
ber for  the  Spen  Valley  would  wish,  because  the  district  trade  com- 
mittee will  make  suggestions  which  will  go  forward  to  the  Central 
Trade  Boards,  and  I  maintain  that  the  suggestions  of  the  district 
trade  committees  will  be  seldom  altered  by  the  Central  Trade  Boards. 
The  right  hon.  Gentleman  said  that  "  wages  should  be  fixed  in 
the  first  instance  between  the  workers  and  their  employers  in  the 
localities,  and  that  the  co-ordination  should  come  afterwards." 
That  is,  I  think,  exactly  what  we  have  done,  because,  so  far  from 
the  localities  being  debarred  from  making  their  own  suggestions 
for  the  government  of  their  own  local  trade,  we  have  provided  by 
clause  12  that  "no  such  minimum  rate  .  .  .  and  no  variation  or 
cancellation  of  (it)  .  .  .  shall  have  effect  unless  either  the  rate  has 
been  recommended  by  the  district  trade  committee  or  an  opportu- 
nity has  been  given  to  the  committee  to  report  thereon  to  the  Trade 
Board,  and  the  Trade  Board  have  considered  the  report  (if  any) 
made  by  the  committee."  It  seems  to  me  that  the  principle  of 
local  government  could  not  be  given  wider  application.  The  hon. 
Member  for  Durham  and  others   have  also  complained  of  the 


SWEATED  LABOUR  235 

optional  character  of  the  Bill.  I  do  not  know  whether  by  that  he 
alludes  to  the  setting  up  of  the  Trade  Boards  or  to  making  their 
determinations  compulsory.  Probably  both.  [An  Hon.  Member  : 
Both.]  On  the  question  of  setting  up  the  Trade  Boards,  I  think 
there  is  very  little  indeed  to  be  said.  The  Board  of  Trade  are  the 
proper  authority  to  set  up  these  bodies,  and  I  can  assure  the  hon. 
Gentleman  that  it  is  the  intention  of  the  Board  of  Trade  to  set 
them  up.  The  word  "  may  "  is  inserted  in  the  Bill  to  be  on  the 
safe  side  in  case  that  it  is  found  impossible  to  set  them  up  in  any 
particular  trade,  and  in  order  that  we  shall  not  be  guilty  of  a  legal 
offence  if  we  fail  to  achieve  the  impossible.  I  think  the  House  will 
believe  in  the  integrity  of  our  intentions,  and  I  trust  it  will  not 
withhold  its  concurrence  from  our  prudential  motive. 

With  regard  to  making  the  determination  compulsory,  the  Board 
of  Trade  is  the  authority  responsible  to  Parliament,  and  that  being 
so,  it  should  retain  to  itself  the  last  word  in  the  matter.  .1  think  an 
arrangement  can  be  arrived  at  between  hon.  Gentlemen  below  the 
gangway  and  ourselves,  which  we  practically  came  to  yesterday, 
by  which  we  may  arrive  at  a  working  agreement.  I  think  I  have 
shown  that  the  evil  with  which  we  are  attempting  to  deal  is  a  real 
evil,  that  it  is  of  old  standing,  and  that  it  clamours  for  remedy.  I 
have  also  shown  that  our  remedy  has  the  same  inspiration  and  the 
same  objective  as  was  possessed  by  the  old  reformers,  and  pro- 
ceeds upon  lines  parallel  with  those  which  have  led  the  State  to 
interfere  with  the  control  of  the  hours  of  labour  and  the  conditions 
of  safety  and  sanitation.  Our  remedy  only  gives  statutory  sanction 
to  principles  and  methods  adopted  in  numberless  cases  by  volun- 
tary agreement,  which  have  been  attended  with  the  greatest  possi- 
ble success.  I  do  not  anticipate  from  this  legislation  either  disloca- 
tion of  trade,  damage  to  employers,  or  diminution  of  employment. 
Our  proposals  are  very  limited  in  their  application,  they  are  limited 
to  those  plague  spots  of  industry  which,  without  drastic  treatment, 
will  continue,  as  they  have  continued  for  three  quarters  of  a  cen- 
tury, feeding  upon  the  national  wealth,  supplying  recruits  to  our 


236  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

hospitals,  asylums,  and  workhouses,  and  swelling  the  ranks  of  the 
unemployed,  and  being  the  forcing  grounds  of  the  unemployable. 
When  I  am  told  that  this  legislation  will  subvert  the  foundations 
upon  which  the  commercial  supremacy  of  this  country  is  based, 
I  decline  to  believe  that  the  commercial  supremacy  of  this  or  any 
other  country  rests  upon  sweated  labour.  If  I  am  told  capital  will 
not  stand  it,  I  answer  there  is  another  and  a  greater  capital  with 
greater  claims  upon  us.  It  is  against  the  drain  upon  this  capital 
that  this  effort  we  are  making  to-day  is  directed  ;  against  this  waste 
we  protest  —  I  mean  the  life  capital  of  the  nation. 


Extract  4J 

SWEATED  LABOUR  AND   FOREIGN  COMPETITION 

(iJ/r.  Arthur  J.  Balfour,  Coinuuvis,  April  28,  igog) 

Mr.  Balfour^:  .  .  .  The  broad  fact  remains  that  the  rate  of 
wages  you  fix  for  one  part  of  the  country  might  or  might  not  be 
suitable  to  another.  And  it  seems  to  me  that  the  difficulties  which 
will  be  thrown  upon  the  Board  of  Trade  will  be  very  great.  While 
those  difficulties  will  undoubtedly  have  the  result  of  restricting  the 
area  over  which  this  Bill  could  be  properly  allowed  to  extend,  that 
difficulty  is  nothing  compared  with  the  competition  between  Brit- 
ish and  foreign  sweated  industries.  Cases  will  clearly  arise  in  this 
country,  unless  you  are  very  careful,  in  which  the  only  result  of 
fixing  a  rate  of  wages  would  be  to  drive  the  industry  out  of  this 
country,  and  send  it  to  another  country.  I  admitted  the  truth  of 
the  statement  that  the  result  of  raising  wages  was  not  in  many 
instances  to  increase  the  price.  The  whole  machinery  of  produc- 
tion may  be  improved,  and  the  whole  raising  of  wages  of  produc- 
tion may  be  improved.    These  wages  are  not  fixed  by  competition, 

1  Parliamentar}'  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  3S4-3S5. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  237 

but  it  is  a  forced  sale  of  value.  It  is  not  competition  value.  It  is 
a  forced  sale  value.  It  is  grossly  unfair  of  anyone  to  say  that  a 
forced  sale  represents  the  true  value  of  the  article  sold.  A  forced 
sale  never  gives  a  true  market  rate  of  wages.  Therefore,  I  do  not 
think  that  if  this  Bill  is  properly  worked,  it  will  interfere  with  any- 
thing that  can  truly  be  said  to  be  a  fair  market  rate  of  wages. 

But  at  the  same  time  there  are  cases  in  which  the  raising  of 
wages  does  not  diminish  the  cost,  there  may  be  and  must  be  cases 
where  the  industry  is  not  carried  on  so  economically  when  the 
wages  are  raised.  How  are  you  going  to  deal  with  these  cases  ? 
You  really  cannot  dismiss  that  as  a  Protectionist  crotchet.  What- 
ever your  views  on  Protection  may  be,  you  are  now  interfering 
not  with  the  fair  value  of  wages  but  with  the  cost  at  which  certain 
articles  may  be  introduced.  You  ought  to  interfere  all  round.  I 
do  not  think  how  you  can  refuse  to  do  so.  Your  only  possible 
alternative  would  be  not  merely  to  restrict  the  operation  of  the 
Bill  to  those  industries  to  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  the 
Member  for  the  Forest  of  Dean  [Sir  Charles  Dilke]  has  referred, 
but  to  take  into  account  the  conditions  under  which  those  indus- 
tries are  carried  on  in  foreign  countries,  and  to  ask  yourselves 
whether  those  industries  are  carried  on  under  sweated  labour.  If 
you  think  that  the  raising  of  wages  in  this  country  will  make  the 
cost  of  production  greater,  you  are  driven  to  the  inevitable  con- 
clusion that  you  are  going  to  hand  over  the  trades  to  foreign 
sweated  labour.  You  are  absolutely  bound  to  make  provision  to 
deal  with  that  difficulty.  Under  this  Bill  the  only  provision  you  can 
make  is  to  exclude  the  industry  in  question  from  the  beneficent 
operations  of  this  measure.  That  is  a  very  unpleasant  alternative. 
But  the  Government  must  face  it.  No  answer  has  been  given,  or 
can  be  given,  and  the  House  must  either  reconcile  itself  to  finding 
some  method  of  regulating  between  home  and  foreign  productions 
in  the  special  industries  or  exclude  them  from  the  operation  of 
the  Bill.  .  .  . 


238  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  44 

A  LABOUR  VIEW  OF  THE  TRADE  BOARDS  BILL 

(Afr.  T.  F.  Richafds,  Com/nons,  April  28,  iQog) 

Mr.  Richards  ^ :  I  regret  exceedingly  that  someone  who  has 
had  some  practical  experience  of  the  sweating  industry  has  not 
had  an  opportunity  to  present  his  view  to  the  House.  With  the 
exception  of  myself,  who  belong  to  the  boot  and  shoe  industry,  and 
the  hon.  Member  for  East  Leeds,  who  belongs  to  the  furnishing 
trade,  I  am  not  aware  that  any  other  hon.  Member  has  any  direct 
association  with  this  particular  industry.  So  far  as  we  are  concerned 
we  regret  exceedingly  that  we  are  not  in  the  schedules.  I  certainly 
should  have  liked  to  see  the  boot  and  shoe  industry  in  the  schedule 
for  more  reasons  than  one.  So  far  as  the  East  End  of  London  is 
concerned,  there  are  24,000  operatives  employed  in  this  industry. 
Whilst  we  in  the  trade  unions  can  protect  ourselves,  the  Hebrew 
workers  of  our  industry  cannot  protect  themselves.  They  have  no 
association,  simply  and  solely  because  their  wages  are  so  small  that 
they  have  not  sufficient  means  to  contribute  to  an  association,  and 
I  want,  if  I  possibly  can,  to  take  this  sweating  question  away  from 
the  manufacturers  for  the  time  being. 

We  do  not  complain  in  our  particular  trade  of  sweated  wages 
paid  by  manufacturers.  What  we  complain  of  is  the  sweater,  the 
middleman,  the  ex-operative,  who  goes  to  the  employer  and  takes 
our  work  and  pays  just  what  wages  he  thinks  fit,  and  by  that 
means  eases  the  direct  manufacturer  of  playing  the  part  which  he 
ought  to  do  in  manufacturing  his  own  goods  direct.  In  my  own 
industry  fifteen  or  twenty  years  ago  in  Leicester  we  were  so  dis- 
gusted at  the  sweating  that  was  in  operation,  where  one  man  often 
took  work  out  and  employed  five,  six,  seven,  eight,  or  nine  boys  or 
youths  whom  he  sweated,  that  we  asked  the  manufacturers  to  make 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  393  sqq. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  239 

structural  alterations  to  their  premises,  and  allow  us  to  go  inside, 
because  we  were  home  workers  at  the  time.  They  demurred  for 
a  time,  but  we  threatened  to  strike  simply  and  solely  because  we 
were  strong  enough  to  strike.  But  I  am  pleased  to  say  that  the 
employers  allowed  us  to  go  indoors. 

Some  members  have  said  that  this  Bill  will  kill  home  work  alto- 
gether. I  think  it  is  going  to  check  home  work,  and  I  should  like 
to  see  home  work  checked  if  we  operatives  cannot  get  a  living  wage. 
In  respect  of  the  statement  of  one  of  my  friends  from  Ireland,  who 
made  the  suggestion  that  the  Irish  members  do  not  want  this  Bill 
to  apply  to  Ireland,  we  have  to-day  received  a  letter  with  a  request 
from  the  Irish  Trade  Union  Congress,  that  we  will  do  everything 
we  possibly  can  to  oppose  the  idea  that  this  should  be  excluded 
from  Ireland.  The  Irish  trade  unionists  know  full  well  that  there 
is  sweating  in  Ireland  the  same  as  in  every  other  part  of  the 
country,  and  it  is  this  middle  sweater  that  I  am  concerned  about. 

For  the  last  fifteen  years  my  work  has  been  to  do  nothing  else 
than  to  settle  disputes  between  our  members  and  employers,  and 
I  challenge  contradiction  when  I  say  that  our  manufacturers  are 
desirous  of  paying  good  wages,  but  they  do  want  us  to  do  our 
utmost  to  bring  everyone  up  to  the  same  standard.  That  is  their 
trouble.  So  far  as  the  men  are  concerned,  in  my  own  industry  we 
have  little  to  complain  of  where  the  men  are  organised.  In  the 
East  End  of  London  it  was  my  duty  only  two  months  ago  to  go 
down  and  find  a  poor  Hebrew,  an  alien  I  admit.  He  was  not 
naturalised.  He  was  working  there.  He  showed  me  his  book, 
and  in  a  month  he  had  not  earned  £2  5  s.,  and  that  very  day  he 
had  received  a  3d.  reduction.  I  said,  "  Why  do  you  stand  to  it  ?  " 
He  said :  "  What  shall  I  do  ?  I  have  a  wife  and  four  children. 
What  am  I  to  do  ? "  His  wages  were  insufficient  to  subscribe  to 
an  organisation  which  would  defend  him,  and  this  Wages  Board 
Bill  I  hope  will  be  utilised  to  assist  cases  of  that  kind. 

This  has  not  always  been  the  case.  There  are  other  parts  of 
the  United  Kingdom  where  this  idea  prevails,  and  so  far  as  our 


240  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

factories  are  concerned  now  it  applies  very  largely  to  females.  Un- 
fortunately the  females  in  our  industry  when  they  get  married 
leave  the  factory  and  work  at  home,  and  as  a  consequence  they 
accept  2S.  6d.,  5  s.,  or  ys.  6d.  Generally  speaking,  los.  is  about  as 
high  a  wage  as  they  get.  Under  the  circumstances  we  might  do 
something  to  improve  the  wages  in  this  particular.  Our  boards  of 
arbitration  in  London  and  in  Leicester  grant  permits  so  that  the 
operative  shall  not  be  persecuted.  In  case  of  illness  or  of  general 
weakness  the  board  of  arbitration,  which  is  composed  of  employers 
and  employed,  grant  a  permit  for  the  persons  who  work  outdoors, 
but  at  the  same  time  they  take  into  consideration  that  that  person 
has  an  adequate  wage  for  the  work  that  he  or  she  performs,  and  this 
is  the  point  that  we  are  considering.  We  want  these  people  to  have 
something  upon  which  they  can  adequately  and  comfortably  exist. 
I  was  astounded  yesterday  to  see  that  case  with  reference  to  the 
Territorial  Army  clothing.  I  have  some  facts  and  information  in 
my  possession  that  the  Government  might  render  assistance  in  that 
particular  and  not  encourage  work  of  this  kind  to  be  given  out  with- 
out enforcing  the  Trade  Union  Rates  of  Wages  Resolution  of  this 
House.  I  think  the  Government  would  do  well  to  strengthen  it 
in  that  particular.  So  far  as  we  as  trade  unions  are  concerned  we 
are  endeavouring  to  the  best  of  our  ability  to  bring  other  countries 
up  to  our  own  standard  because  we  have  intercommunication  and 
international  trade  union  conferences,  and  I  hope  by  that  means 
we  shall  make  the  improvement  that  we  think  is  necessary  in  this 
way.  I  do  not  think  for  a  moment  that  anyone  will  be  persecuted 
if  only  we  adopt  the  policy  which  these  boards  of  arbitration  do, 
namely,  that  if  a  person  happens  to  be  aged  or  infirm  or  feeble 
and  cannot  work  inside  a  factorv^  he  ought  to  have  an  opportunity 
of  working  outdoors.  We  have  been  told  by  the  representative 
from  Birmingham  that  we  might  kill  this  trade.  We  ought  to  kill 
a  trade  which  will  not  give  an  adult  man  or  woman  after  working 
60  hours  a  week  more  than  5s.  or  6s.  I  have  no  love  or  regard  for 
trades  of  that  description ;  they  ought  to  come  under  the  general 


SWEATED  LABOUR  24 1 

purview  of  this  nation  as  a  whole.  I  know  full  well  that  so  far 
as  my  own  trade  is  concerned  there  is  not  'a  single  manufacturer 
with  whom  I  have  come  in  contact  who  complains  that  because 
we  have  got  men  working  indoors,  because  we  have  raised  wages 
in  many  cases,  it  has  checked  their  methods  of  manufacture, 
and  I  refuse  to  believe  that  it  is  likely  to  check  the  method  of 
manufacture  in  these  industries.  I  am  satisfied  in  my  own  mind 
that  if  the  Bill  is  given  an  opportunity,  and  boards  are  set  up  with 
an  equal  number  of  representatives  of  workmen  and  of  manufac- 
turers, there  will  be  no  injustice  perpetrated  or  perpetuated  on  the 
trade  or  on  the  operatives. 


Extract  ^5 

THE   LORDS'   DEBATE  — A   LIBERAL  VIEW 

{Lord  HiDiiilton  of  Dalzell,  Lords ^  Augiisi  jo,  igog) 

Lord  Hamilton  of  Dalzell  ■^ :  My  Lords,  the  main  object  of 
this  Bill  is  the  establishment  of  a  minimum  rate  of  wages  in  certain 
trades  in  which  what  is  termed  sweating  is  well  known  to  exist. 
The  establishment  by  statute  of  a  minimum  rate  of  wages  is,  I 
suppose,  a  novel  expedient,  but  your  Lordships  are  aware  that 
regulation  of  the  conditions  of  labour  in  certain  trades  is  by  no 
means  new,  and  that  ever  since  the  passing  of  the  First  Factory 
Act  Parliament  has  from  time  to  time  agreed  to  legislation  having 
that  object.  Only  last  year  your  Lordships  agreed  to  a  Bill  limiting 
the  hours  of  labour  in  mines.  I  have  lived  all  my  life  amongst 
miners,  and  I  never  doubted  for  a  moment  that  the  passing  of  that 
Bill  was  a  right  and  a  just  measure ;  but  I  confess  that  I  had  an 
uneasy  feeling,  not  with  regard  to  those  whom  the  Bill  affected, 
but  with  regard  to  those  who  were  not  included  in  it.  I  felt,  and 
I  think  many  of  }'our  Lordships  may  have  felt,  that  besides  the 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  2,  col.  974  sqq. 


242  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

miners  —  and  I  am  sure  we  do  not  grudge  them  their  good  luck 
—  there  were  many  other  people,  helpless  people,  with  no  political 
or  other  organisation,  who  stood  in  equal  need  of  help.  Therefore 
I  am  glad,  and  I  believe  your  Lordships  will  be  glad,  that  the  case 
of  those  poor  and  helpless  people  is  now  to  be  dealt  with.  But  I 
admit  that  that  is  a  sentimental  consideration,  and  it  is  a  considera- 
tion which  is,  perhaps,  out  of  place  in  dealing  with  a  Bill  which  is 
not  based  upon  sentiment  but  upon  hard  solid  facts. 

I  think  the  facts  are  well  known  to  us  all.  Everyone  knows 
what  sweating  is,  and  everyone  acknowledges  it  to  be  a  great  evil. 
It  is  not  a  new  thing.  It  has  been  known  to  exist  and  its  existence 
has  been  noted  for  the  last  fifty  years  or  more.  I  do  not  suppose 
that  during  the  last  twenty  years  there  is  any  feature  of  our  social 
system  which  has  been  so  much  inquired  into,  so  much  spoken  about, 
and  so  much  written  about  as  the  evil  of  sweating ;  and  the  Gov- 
ernment are  of  opinion  that  the  time  has  now  come  when  the  only 
practical  remedy  should  be  applied.  It  is  not  only  in  this  country 
that  sweating  has  excited  attention.  It  has  excited  attention  in 
practically  every  civilised  country,  and  in  Germany,  in  particular, 
I  understand  that  legislation  on  this  subject  is  imminent.  I  would 
commend  that  fact  to  anyone  who  may  be  afraid  that  by  legisla- 
tion of  this  sort  trade  in  this  country  may  be  driven  abroad ;  and 
I  would  point  out  that  even  if  we  do  move  a  little  faster  in  this 
matter  than  other  countries,  and  if  we  do  take  the  lead,  as  in  a 
matter  of  this  sort  I  think  we  ought  to  take  the  lead,  we  shall  prob- 
ably not  maintain  that  lead  indefinitely,  because  other  countries  are 
moving,  and  moving  very  fast,  in  the  same  direction. 

I  shall  not  attempt  to  coin  a  new  definition  of  "  sweating."  There 
are  many  such  in  circulation  already,  but  I  will  take  what  I  believe 
to  be  the  ordinary  meaning  of  the  word  — -  the  payment  by  an  em- 
ployer to  his  workpeople  of  a  wage  which  is  insufficient  to  purchase 
for  them  the  necessaries  of  life ;  and  in  bringing  forward  this  Bill 
I  would  simply  ask  your  Lordships  whether  or  not  you  consider 
that  such  wages  ought  to  continue  to  be  paid.    I  do  not  think  that 


SWEATED  LABOUR  243 

there  can  be  more  than  one  answer  to  such  a  question.  It  is  al- 
ready, to  our  credit  as  a  nation,  a  punishable  offence  in  this  coun- 
try to  allow  an  animal  which  is  dependent  upon  us  to  starve,  and 
it  does  not  seem  very  much  to  ask  that  the  same  principle  should 
be  extended  to  human  beings.  When  an  insufficient  wage  is  paid, 
something  approaching  starvation  must  take  place,  perhaps  not 
actually  in  the  matter  of  food,  but  in  poorness  of  clothing,  poor- 
ness of  lodging,  and  bad  quality  of  food  —  that  is,  unless  the  in- 
sufficient wages  are  supplemented  from  some  other  source.  There 
are  cases,  of  course,  in  which  the  wages  are  so  supplemented.  In 
some  cases  that  may  be  done  by  charitable  relief,  perhaps  rather 
misplaced  charitable  relief,  and  even  I  believe  by  Poor  Law  relief 
in  some  form  or  another.  I  think  it  might  fairly  be  said  that  a  trade 
which  cannot  exist  without  such  assistance  must  be  a  thoroughly 
rotten  one  and  a  trade  of  which  we  should  be  well  rid. 

But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  is  not  the  slightest  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  any  trade  will  either  be  killed  or  driven  abroad  by  this 
Bill,  and  I  do  not  think  that  any  better  proof  of  that  is  needed 
than  the  warm  support  which  has  been  given  to  this  Bill  by  almost 
all  of  those,  both  masters  and  men,  connected  with  the  trades  men- 
tioned in  the  Schedule.  What  we  imagine  will  happen  will  be  that 
a  levelling-up  process  will  take  place.  The  best  class  of  employer, 
the  man  who  pays  fair  wages  now,  will  continue  to  pay  fair  wages  ; 
the  second  class  of  employer,  the  man  who  we  have  reason  to 
believe  would  like  to  pay  fair  wages  but  is  afraid  of  having  his 
prices  undercut  by  the  class  immediately  below  him,  will  be  enabled 
to  pay  fair  wages ;  and  the  third  class  of  employer,  the  genuine 
sweater,  will  have  to  pay  fair  wages  whether  he  likes  it  or  not. 
There  is  one  source  from  which  wages  may  be  supplemented  which 
I  have  not  mentioned,  and  which  falls  under  a  rather  different  head- 
ing. There  are  certain  people,  principally  women,  who  wish  to  earn 
a  little  money  but  are  not  really  dependent  on  the  trade  for  their 
living,  such  as  girls  living  at  home  with  their  family  or  married 
women  who  have  no  children  to  look  after.   It  sometimes  happens 


244  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

that  for  the  purpose  of  earning  a  few  shillings,  a  little  spending 
money,  such  people  are  willing  to  accept  considerably  less  than  the 
market  rate  of  wages,  and  it  may  perhaps  be  said  thaf  if  both 
parties  are  agreeable  to  that  arrangement,  there  is  no  reason  to 
interfere.  But  I  think,  my  Lords,  that  it  is  necessary  to  look  a 
little  deeper  than  that,  and  if  we  do,  it  will  be  seen  that  it  is  far 
from  right  that  those  people,  for  the  purpose  of  earning  a  little 
pocket  money,  should  drag  down  the  level  of  wages  and  inflict 
serious  injury  on  people  who  have  to  depend  on  the  trade  for  their 
living.  There  is  no  reason  why  these  people  should  not  be  paid  at 
the  same  rate  as  any  other  people  doing  the  same  work.  If  their 
work  is  worth  having,  it  must  be  worth  paying  for.  If  they  only 
devote  part  of  their  time  to  this  work,  they  will  naturally  not  earn 
as  much  in  a  day  as  a  person  of  equal  ability  who  devotes  the 
whole  day  to  the  work.  But  the  point  is  that  the  rate  should  be 
the  same.  There  is  no  reason  why  it  should  not  be,  and  therefore 
we  do  not  propose  to  make  any  exception  in  those  cases. 

Four  trades  have  been  selected  for  the  purposes  of  the  Bill, 
and  they  are  set  out  in  the  Schedule.  They  are  certain  parts  of 
the  tailoring  trade,  the  paper-box-making  trade,  certain  parts  of 
the  commoner  lace-  and  net-finishing  trade,  and  certain  parts  of  the 
chain-making  trade.  Those  are  all  trades  in  which  sweating  is 
acknowledged  to  exist.  There  are  provisions  in  the  Bill  to  enable 
its  extension  to  other  trades,  and  it  is  the  intention  that  trades 
carried  on  under  similar  circumstances  shall  be  included.  That 
will  be  done  on  the  initiative  of  the  Board  of  Trade  and  will  be 
carried  out  by  means  of  a  Provisional  Order  Bill.  Thus  your  Lord- 
ships will  see  that  the  control  of  Parliament  in  the  case  of  the 
inclusion  of  a  new  trade  is  absolutely  maintained.  \\'hat  will  hap- 
pen will  be  this.  The  Board  of  Trade  will  say  that  in  their  opinion 
the  Act  ought  to  be  extended  to  a  certain  trade,  and  a  Provisional 
Order  will  be  promoted  in  the  ordinary  way  and  passed  through 
Parliament  with  the  objipct  of  carrying  that  out.  It  will  rest  entirely 
with  Parliament  to  say  whether  or  not  that  Bill  should  pass.    I 


SWEATED  LABOUR  245 

should  like  to  say  here,  as  strongly  as  possible,  that  it  is  not  fair, 
as  has  been  done,  to  describe  this  Bill  as  being  the  thin  end  of  a 
wedge.  The  scope  of  the  Bill  is  absolutely  defined,  and  there  is 
no  intention  of  using  its  provisions  as  a  general  means  of  regulating 
wages  in  all  trades.  If  your  Lordships  will  turn  to  subsection  (2) 
of  Clause  i,  you  will  see  that  it  is  not  possible  that  the  Bill  should 
be  so  used.  In  that  subsection  the  Board  of  Trade  are  only  given 
power  to  make  a  Provisional  Order  "  if  they  are  satisfied  that 
the  rate  of  wages  prevailing  in  any  branch  of  the  trade  is  excep- 
tionally low."  It  will  therefore  be  seen  that  the  machinery  for  in- 
cluding a  new  trade  can  only  be  set  in  motion  if  those  exceptional 
circumstances  can  be  shown  to  exist.  .  .  . 

Extract  ^6 

THE   LORDS'   DEBATE  — A   CONSERVATIVE  VIEW 
{Marquess  of  Salisbu/y,  Lords,  August  jo,  igog) 

The  Marquess  of  Salisbury  ^ :  My  Lords,  I  am  sure  your 
Lordships  will  all  be  of  opinion  that  in  the  interesting  observations 
which  the  noble  Lord  opposite  has  just  made  he  has  not  said  one 
word  too  much  in  commiserating  the  position  of  those  unfortunate 
women  who  are  the  victims  of  this  sweated  labour.  There  is  no 
spectacle  more  deplorable  than  that  of  these  unfortunate  workers, 
not  themselves  able  to  fight  their  way  through  life  in  a  manner 
which  men  might  do,  and  subject  to  most  adverse  conditions  both 
of  work  and  of  wages.  Nothing  that  the  noble  Lord  has  said, 
nothing  that  any  of  your  Lordships  can  say,  will  be  an  exaggera- 
tion of  the  pitifulness  of  the  cases  of  which  testimony  was  given 
before  the  Select  Committee  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

But,  my  Lords,  I  thought,  if  I  may  be  allowed  to  criticise  the 
general  tenor  of  the  noble  Lord's  remarks,  that  he  made  too  light 
of  the  difficulty  of  dealing  with  this  subject.  He  said  the  procedure 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  2,  col.  979  sqq. 


246  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  the  Bill  was  simple.  I  am  sure  that  I  agree  with  him,  but,  even 
if  the  procedure  of  the  Bill  is  simple,  certainly  the  subject  matter 
with  which  the  Bill  deals  is  not  simple,  but,  on  the  contrary,  very 
complicated.  It  would  be  a  mistake  if  your  Lordships  thought 
that  the  mass  of  home  workers  are  sweated.  The  evidence  appears 
to  be  conclusive  in  the  other  direction.  Apparently,  the  majority 
of  home  workers  are  persons,  no  doubt  working  at  a  very  low 
standard  in  the  industrial  scale,  but  perfectly  able  to  look  after 
themselves,  and,  in  a  sense,  well-to-do.  But  there  is  a  minority,  a 
very  considerable  minority,  a  deplorable  minority,  in  connection 
with  whom  those  conditions  do  not  obtain.  Unfortunately,  it  is 
impossible  to  legislate  with  regard  to  one  set  of  workers  —  namely, 
those  whom  we  pity  —  without  affecting  the  case  of  those  workers 
who  are  perfectly  well-to-do,  and,  in  a  measure,  quite  satisfied  with 
the  present  conditions  of  their  life.  That  is  the  first  difficulty,  and 
it  is  a  very  great  difficulty. 

There  is  a  second  difficulty  which  pertains,  not  to  the  generality 
of  the  workers,  but  to  those  very  workers  whom  we  are  here  to-day 
to  pity,  and,  if  possible,  to  succour.  It  would  be  a  cruel  kindness 
if  by  any  legislation  to  which  your  Lordships'  House  gave  assent 
we  were  to  add  to  the  sufferings  of  these  poor  workers  one  further 
crushing  disaster  —  namely,  to  take  away  from  them  the  only  work 
they  have.  Therefore,  we  must  walk  very  warily,  and  I  confess  I 
regretted  the  tone  of  confidence  which  I  think  was  the  feature  of 
the  noble  Lord's  speech.  He  was  only  following  the  example  of 
his  chief.  I  noticed  that  the  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade, 
speaking  in  another  place  and  upon  another  Bill,  —  the  Labour 
Exchanges  Bill,  —  sketched  a  picture  of  a  sort  of  universal  condi- 
tion of  Trade  Boards.  When  he  was  advocating  the  necessary 
expense  for  the  edifices  under  the  Labour  Exchanges  Bill  he  spoke 
as  though  there  would  be  a  Trade  Board  meeting  in  every  such 
building,  which  he  put  forward  as  a  reason  for  its  existence.  That 
may  be,  or  may  not  be,  an  ultimate  development,  but  at  the 
present  moment  the  matter  is  only  experimental,  and  I  hope  your 


SWEATED  LABOUR  247 

Lordships  will  treat  it  as  experimental.  Whether  hereafter  this 
experiment  may  be  a  success,  and  whether  your  Lordships  will 
agree  under  the  provisions  of  the  Bill  to  extend  its  operation  to 
other  trades,  are  matters  in  which  we  need  not  inquire  at  the 
present  moment.  Let  us  first  see  how  this  experiment  succeeds 
before  we  cast  our  eyes  further  afield. 

I  confess  that  I  see  no  way  out  of  the  main  proposition  which 
the  Government  have  put  before  your  Lordships'  House.  As  far 
as  I  myself  am  concerned,  I  assent  to  the  establishment  of  these 
Trade  Boards,  whose  principal  function  is  to  fix  a  minimum  rate 
of  wages.  I  do  so  because  the  ordinary  trade  remedy  for  these 
evils  appears  to  be  impracticable  —  I  mean  the  union  of  the 
workers.  That  is  the  proper  remedy  wherever  it  can  be  applied, 
and  that  is  the  remedy  one  would  like  to  see  applied  in  these 
cases.  They  know  much  better  —  I  am  speaking  of  employer  and 
employed  —  what  is  good  for  them  than  any  Trade  Board  which 
the  ingenuity  of  the  Government  or  of  your  Lordships'  House  can 
construct.  But,  unfortunately,  the  evidence  is  almost  conclusive 
that  these  women  have  not  made  sufficient  progress  in  the  arts  of 
citizenship  to  be  able  to  combine  in  a  trade  union,  and  until  they 
do  I  presume  we  must  be  content  with  this  procedure,  not  so  good 
and  not  so  effective  as  the  other  would  have  been.  .  .  . 

Extract  /fj 

TRADE  BOARDS   ACT,   1909 

(9  Edw.  7,  ch.  22) 

An  Act  to  provide  for  the  establishment  of  Trade  Boards  for 
certain  Trades.  (20th  October  1909) 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 


248  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Establishment  of  Trade  Boards  for  Trades  to  which  the 
Act  applies 

I.  Application  of  Act  to  Cetiain  Trades 

(i)  This  Act  shall  apply  to  the  trades  specified  in  the  schedule 
to  this  Act  and  to  any  other  trades  to  which  it  has  been  applied  by 
Provisional  Order  of  the  Board  of  Trade  made  under  this  section. 

(2)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  make  a  Provisional  Order  apply- 
ing this  Act  to  any  specified  trade  to  which  it  does  not  at  the  time 
apply  if  they  are  satisfied  that  the  rate  of  wages  prevailing  in  any 
branch  of  the  trade  is  exceptionally  low,  as  compared  with  that  in 
other  employments,  and  that  the  other  circumstances  of  the  trade 
are  such  as  to  render  the  application  of  this  Act  to  the  trade 
expedient, 

(3)  If  at  any  time  the  Board  of  Trade  consider  that  the  con- 
ditions of  employment  in  any  trade  to  which  this  Act  applies 
have  been  so  altered  as  to  render  the  application  of  this  Act  to  the 
trade  unnecessary,  they  may  make  a  Provisional  Order  that  this 
Act  shall  cease  to  apply  to  that  trade. 

(4)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  submit  to  Parliament  for  confir- 
mation any  Provisional  Order  made  by  them  in  pursuance  of  this 
section,  but  no  such  Order  shall  have  effect  unless  and  until  it  is 
confirmed  by  Parliament. 

(5)  If,  while  a  Bill  confirming  any  such  Order  is  pending  in 
either  House  of  Parliament,  a  petition  is  presented  against  any 
Order  comprised  therein,  the  Bill,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  that  Order, 
may  be  referred  to  a  select  committee,  or,  if  the  two  Houses  of 
Parliament  think  fit  so  to  order,  to  a  joint  committee  of  those 
Houses,  and  the  petitioner  shall  be  allowed  to  appear  and  oppose 
as  in  the  case  of  Private  Bills. 

(6)  Any  Act  confirming  a  Provisional  Order  made  in  pursuance 
of  this  section  may  be  repealed,  altered,  or  amended  by  any  sub- 
sequent Provisional  Order  made  by  the  Board  of  Trade  and 
confirmed  by  Parliament. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  249 

2.   Esfal>Iis/i7}ient  of  Trade  Boards  for  the  P.articidar  Trades 

(i)  The  Board  of  Trade  shall,  if  practicable,  establish  one  or 
more  Trade  Boards  constituted  in  accordance  with  regulations  made 
under  this  Act  for  any  trade  to  which  this  Act  applies  or  for  any 
branch  of  work  in  the  trade. 

Where  a  Trade  Board  is  established  under  this  Act  for  any  trade 
or  branch  of  work  in  a  trade  which  is  carried  on  to  any  substantial 
extent  in  Ireland,  a  separate  Trade  Board  shall  be  established  for 
that  trade  or  branch  of  work  in  a  trade  in  Ireland. 

(2)  Where  a  Trade  Board  has  been  established  for  any  branch 
of  work  in  a  trade,  any  reference  in  this  Act  to  the  trade  for 
which  the  Board  is  established  shall  be  construed  as  a  reference 
to  the  branch  of  work  in  the  trade  for  which  the  Board  has  been 
established. 

J.    Genc?-al  Duties  of  Trade  Boards 

A  Trade  Board  for  any  trade  shall  consider,  as  occasion  requires, 
any  matter  referred  to  them  by  a  Secretary  of  State,  the  Board  of 
Trade,  or  any  other  Government  department,  with  reference  to 
the  industrial  conditions  of  the  trade,  and  shall  make  a  report 
upon  the  matter  to  the  department  by  whom  the  question  has 
been  referred. 

Minimum  Rates  of  Wages 

4.  Duties  and  Powers  of  Trade  Boards  with  Respect  to  Minimum 
Kates  of  Wages 

(i)  Trade  Boards  shall,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  section, 
fix  minimum  rates  of  wages  for  timework  for  their  trades  (in  this 
Act  referred  to  as  minimum  time-rates),  and  may  also  fix  general 
minimum  rates  of  wages  for  piecework  for  their  trades  (in  this  Act 
referred  to  as  general  minimum  piece-rates),  and  those  rates  of 
wages  (whether  time-  or  piece-rates)  may  be  fixed  so  as  to  apply 
universally  to  the  trade,  or  so  as  to  apply  to  any  special  process 


250  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

in  the  work  of  the  trade  or  to  any  special  class  of  workers  in  the 
trade,  or  to  any  special  area. 

If  a  Trade  Board  report  to  the  Board  of  Trade  that  it  is  im- 
practicable in  any  case  to  fix  a  minimum  time-rate  in  accordance 
with  this  section,  the  Board  of  Trade  may  so  far  as  respects  that 
case  relieve  the  Trade  Board  of  their  duty. 

(2)  Before  fixing  any  minimum  time-rate  or  general  minimum 
piece-rate,  the  Trade  Board  shall  give  notice  of  the  rate  which 
they  propose  to  fix  and  consider  any  objections  to  the  rate  which 
may  be  lodged  with  them  within  three  months. 

(3)  The  Trade  Board  shall  give  notice  of  any  minimum  time- 
rate  or  general  minimum  piece-rate  fixed  by  them. 

(4)  A  Trade  Board  may,  if  they  think  it  expedient,  cancel  or 
vary  any  minimum  time-rate  or  general  minimum  piece-rate  fixed 
under  this  Act,  and  shall  reconsider  any  such  minimum  rate  if  the 
Board  of  Trade  direct  them  to  do  so,  whether  an  application  is 
made  for  the  purpose  or  not : 

Provided  that  the  provisions  of  this  section  as  to  notice  shall 
apply  where  it  is  proposed  to  cancel  or  vary  the  minimum  rate 
fixed  under  the  foregoing  provisions  in  the  same  manner  as  they 
apply  where  it  is  proposed  to  fix  a  minimum  rate. 

(5)  A  Trade  Board  shall  on  the  application  of  any  .employer  fix 
a  special  minimum  piece-rate  to  apply  as  respects  the  persons  em- 
ployed by  him  in  cases  to  which  a  minimum  time-rate  but  no  general 
minimum  piece-rate  is  applicable,  and  may  as  they  think  fit  cancel 
or  vary  any  such  rate  either  on  the  application  of  the  employer 
or  after  notice  to  the  employer,  such  notice  to  be  given  not  less 
than  one  month  before  cancellation  or  variation  of  any  such  rate. 

5.  Order  giving  Obligatory  Effect  to  Miniminn  Rates  of  JVages 

(i)  Until  a  minimum  time-rate  or  general  minimum  piece-rate 
fixed  by  a  Trade  Board  has  been  made  obligatory  by  order  of  the 
Board  of  Trade  under  this  section,  the  operation  of  the  rate  shall 
be  limited  as  in  this  Act  provided. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  25 1 

(2)  Upon  the  expiration  of  six  months  from  the  date  on  which 
a  Trade  Board  have  given  notice  of  any  minimum  time-rate  or 
general  minimum  piece-rate  fixed  by  them,  the  Board  of  Trade 
shall  make  an  order  (in  this  Act  referred  to  as  an  obligatory  order) 
making  that  minimum  rate  obligatoiy  in  cases  in  which  it  is  applica- 
ble on  all  persons  employing  labour  and  on  all  persons  employed, 
unless  they  are  of  opinion  that  the  circumstances  are  such  as  to 
make  it  premature  or  otherwise  undesirable  to  make  an  obligatory 
order,  and  in  that  case  they  shall  make  an  order  suspending  the 
obligatory  operation  of  the  rate  (in  this  Act  referred  to  as  an  order 
of  suspension). 

(3)  Where  an  order  of  suspension  has  been  made  as  respects 
any  rate,  the  Trade  Board  may,  at  any  time  after  the  expiration 
of  six  months  from  the  date  of  the  order,  apply  to  the  Board  of 
Trade  for  an  obligatory  order  as  respects  that  rate ;  and  on  any 
such  application  the  Board  of  Trade  shall  make  an  obligatory 
order  as  respects  that  rate,  unless  they  are  of  opinion  that  a  further 
order  of  suspension  is  desirable,  and,  in  that  case,  they  shall  make 
such  a  further  order,  and  the  provisions  of  this  section  which  are 
applicable  to  the  first  order  of  suspension  shall  apply  to  any  such 
further  order. 

An  order  of  suspension  as  respects  any  rate  shall  have  effect  until 
an  obligatory  order  is  made  by  the  Board  of  Trade  under  this  section. 

(4)  The  Board  of  Trade  may,  if  they  think  fit,  make  an  order 
to  apply  generally  as  respects  any  rates  which  may  be  fixed  by 
any  Trade  Board  constituted,  or  about  to  be  constituted,  for  any 
trade  to  which  this  Act  applies,  and  while  the  order  is  in  force  any 
minimum  time-rate  or  general  minimum  piece-rate  shall,  after  the 
lapse  of  six  months  from  the  date  on  which  the  Trade  Board  have 
given  notice  of  the  fixing  of  the  rate,  be  obligatory  in  the  same 
manner  as  if  the  Board  of  Trade  had  made  an  order  making  the 
rate  obligatory  under  this  section,  unless  in  any  particular  case  the 
Board  of  Trade,  on  the  application  of  any  person  interested,  direct 
to  the  contrary. 


252  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

The  Board  of  Trade  may  revoke  any  such  general  order  at 
any  time  after  giving  three  months'  notice  to  the  Trade  Board 
of  their  intention  to  revoke  it. 


6.  Penalty 

(i)  Where  any  minimum  rate  of  wages  fixed  by  a  Trade  Board 
has  been  made  obligatory  by  order  of  the  Board  of  Trade  under 
this  Act,  an  employer  shall,  in  cases  to  which  the  minimum  rate  is 
applicable,  pay  wages  to  the  person  employed  at  not  less  than 
the  minimum  rate  clear  of  all  deductions,  and  if  he  fails  to  do  so 
shall  be  liable  on  summary  conviction  in  respect  of  each  offence  to 
a  fine  not  exceeding  twenty  pounds  and  to  a  fine  not  exceeding  five 
pounds  for  each  day  on  which  the  offence  is  continued  after  convic- 
tion therefor. 

(2)  On  the  conviction  of  an  employer  under  this  section  for  fail- 
ing to  pay  wages  at  not  less  than  the  minimum  rate  to  a  person 
employed,  the  court  may  by  the  conviction  adjudge  the  employer 
convicted  to  pay,  in  addition  to  any  fine,  such  sum  as  appears 
to  the  court  to  be  due  to  the  person  employed  on  account  of  wages, 
the  wages  being  calculated  on  the  basis  of  the  minimum  rate,  but 
the  power  to  order  the  payment  of  wages  under  this  provision  shall 
not  be  in  derogation  of  any  right  of  the  person  employed  to  recover 
wages  by  any  other  proceedings. 

(3)  If  a  Trade  Board  are  satisfied  that  any  worker  employed,  or 
desiring  to  be  employed,  on  time-work  in  any  branch  of  a  trade  to 
which  a  minimum  time-rate  fixed  by  the  Trade  Board  is  applicable 
is  affected  by  any  infirmity  or  physical  injury  which  renders  him 
incapable  of  earning  that  minimum  time-rate,  and  are  of  opinion 
that  the  case  cannot  suitably  be  met  by  employing  the  worker  on 
piece-work,  the  Trade  Board  may,  if  they  think  fit,  grant  to  the 
worker,  subject  to  such  conditions,  if  any,  as  they  prescribe,  a  per- 
mit exempting  the  employment  of  the  worker  from  the  provisions 
of  this  Act  rendering  the  minimum  time-rate  obligatory,  and,  while 


SWEATED  LABOUR  253 

the  permit  is  in  force,  an  employer  shall  not  be  liable  to  any  penalty 
for  paying  wages  to  the  worker  at  a  rate  less  than  the  minimum 
time-rate  so  long  as  any  conditions  prescribed  by  the  Trade  Board 
on  the  grant  of  the  permit  are  complied  with. 

(4)  On  any  prosecution  of  an  employer  under  this  section,  it 
shall  lie  on  the  employer  to  prove  by  the  production  of  proper 
wages  sheets  or  other  records  of  wages  or  otherwise  that  he  has 
not  paid,  or  agreed  to  pay,  wages  at  less  than  the  minimum  rate. 

(5)  Any  agreement  for  the  payment  of  wages  in  contravention 
of  this  provision  shall  be  void. 


y.  Limited  Operation  of  Minimum  Rate  zvhich  has  not  l>een 
made  Obligatory 

(i)  Where  any  minimum  rate  of  wages  has  been  fixed  by  a  Trade 
Board,  but  is  not  for  the  time  being  obligatory  under  an  order  of 
the  Board  of  Trade  made  in  pursuance  of  this  Act,  the  rninimum 
rate  shall,  unless  the  Board  of  Trade  direct  to  the  contrary  in  any 
case  in  which  they  have  directed  the  Trade  Board  to  reconsider  the 
rate,  have  a  limited  operation  as  follows : 

{a^  In  all  cases  to  which  the  minimum  rate  is  applicable  an  em- 
ployer shall,  in  the  absence  of  a  written  agreement  to  the 
contrary,  pay  to  the  person  employed  wages  at  not  less 
than  the  minimum  rate,  and,  in  the  absence  of  any  such 
agreement,  the  person  employed  may  recover  wages  at 
such  a  rate  from  the  employer ; 
(/-')  Any  employer  may  give  written  notice  to  the  Trade  Board 
by  whom  the  minimum  rate  has  been  fixed  that  he  is  will- 
ing that  that  rate  should  be  obligatory  on  him,  and  in  that 
case  he  shall  be  under  the  same  obligation  to  pay  wages 
to  the  person  employed  at  not. less  than  the  minimum  rate, 
and  be  liable  to  the  same  fine  for  not  doing  so,  as  he 
would  be  if  an  order  of  the  Board  of  Trade  were  in  force 
making  the  rate  obligatory ;  and 


254  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(/)  No  contract  involving  employment  to  which  the  minimum 
rate  is  applicable  shall  be  given  by  a  Government  depart- 
ment or  local  authority  to  any  employer  unless  he  has 
given  notice  to  the  Trade  Board  in  accordance  with  the 
foregoing  provision : 

Provided  that  in  case  of  any  public  emergency  the 
Board  of  Trade  may  by  order,  to  the  extent  and  during 
the  period  named  in  the  order,  suspend  the  operation  of 
this  provision  as  respects  contracts  for  any  such  work 
being  done  or  to  be  done  on  behalf  of  the  Crown  as  is 
specified  in  the  order. 
(2)  A  Trade  Board  shall  keep  a  register  of  any  notices  given 
under  this  section  : 

The  register  shall  be  open  to  public  inspection  without  payment 
of  any  fee,  and  shall  be  evidence  of  the  matters  stated  therein : 

Any  copy  purporting  to  be  certified  by  the  secretary  of  the  Trade 
Board  or  any  officer  of  the  Trade  Board  authorised  for  the  purpose 
to  be  a  true  copy  of  any  entry  in  the  register  shall  be  admissible  in 
evidence  without  further  proof. 

8.  Special  Provision  for  Piece-work  Employees 

An  employer  shall,  in  cases  where  persons  are  employed  on  piece- 
work and  a  minimum  time-rate  but  no  general  minimum  piece-rate 
has  been  fixed,  be  deemed  to  pay  wages  at  less  than  the  minimum 
rate  — 

(a)  in  cases  where  a  special  minimum  piece-rate  has  been  fixed 
under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  for  persons  employed  by 
the  employer,  if  the  rate  of  wages  paid  is  less  than  that 
special  minimum  piece-rate  ;  and 
(J)) '  in  cases  where  a  special  minimum  piece-rate  has  not  been 
so  fixed,  unless  he  shows  that  the  piece-rate  of  wages 
paid  would  yield,  in  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  to  an 
ordinary  worker  at  least  the  same  amount  of  money  as 
the  minimum  time-rate. 


SWEATED  LABOUR  255 

g.  Preveiition  of  Evasion 

Any  shopkeeper,  dealer,  or  trader,  who  by  way  of  trade  makes 
any  arrangement  express  or  implied  with  any  worker  in  pursuance 
of  which  the  worker  performs  any  work  for  which  a  minimum  rate 
of  wages  has  been  fixed  under  this  Act,  shaUHDe  deemed  for  the 
purposes  of  this  Act  to  be  the  employer  of  the  worker,  and  the  net 
remuneration  obtainable  by  the  worker  in  respect  of  the  work  after 
allowing  for  his  necessary  expenditure  in  connection  with  the  work 
shall  be  deemed  to  be  wages. 

10.  Consideration  of  Complaints 

(i)  Any  worker  or  any  person  authorised  by  a  worker  may  com- 
plain to  the  Trade  Board  that  the  wages  paid  to  the  worker  by  any 
employer  in  any  case  to  which  any  minimum  rate  fixed  by  the 
Trade  Board  is  applicable  are  at  a  rate  less  than  the  minimum  rate, 
and  the  Trade  Board  shall  consider  the  matter  and  may,  if  they  think 
fit,  take  any  proceedings  under  this  Act  on  behalf  of  the  worker. 

(2)  Before  taking  any  proceedings  under  this  Act  on  behalf  of 
the  worker,  a  Trade  Board  may,  and  on  the  first  occasion  on  which 
proceedings  are  contemplated  by  the  Trade  Board  against  an  em- 
ployer they  shall,  take  reasonable  steps  to  bring  the  case  to  the 
notice  of  the  employer,  with  a  view  to  the  settlement  of  the  case 
without  recourse  to  proceedings. 

Constitution,  Proceedings,  etc.  of  Trade  Boards 

II.  Constitution  of  Trade  Boards 

(i)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  make  regulations  with  respect  to 
the  constitution  of  Trade  Boards  which  shall  consist  of  members 
representing  employers  and  members  representing  workers  (in  this 
Act  referred  to  as  representative  members)  in  equal  proportions 
and  of  the  appointed  members.  Any  such  regulations  may  be  made 
so  as  to  apply  generally  to  the  constitution  of  all  Trade  Boards,  or 


256  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

specially  to  the  constitution  of  any  particular  Trade  Board  or  any 
particular  class  of  Trade  Boards. 

(2)  Women  shall  be  eligible  as  members  of  Trade  Boards  as 
well  as  men. 

(3)  The  representative  members  shall  be  elected  or  nominated, 
or  partly  elected  and  partly  nominated  as  may  be  provided  by  the 
regulations,  and  in  framing  the  regulations  the  representation  of 
home  workers  on  Trade  Boards  shall  be  provided  for  in  all  trades 
in  which  a  considerable  proportion  of  home  workers  are  engaged. 

(4)  The  chairman  of  a  Trade  Board  shall  be  such  one  of  the 
members  as  the  Board  of  Trade  may  appoint,  and  the  secretary 
of  the  Trade  Board  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Board  of  Trade. 

(5)  The  proceedings  of  a  Trade  Board  shall  not  be  invalidated 
by  any  vacancy  in  their  number,  or  by  any  defect  in  the  appoint- 
ment, election,  or  nomination  of  any  member. 

(6)  In  order  to  constitute  a  meeting  of  a  Trade  Board,  at  least 
one  third  of  the  whole  number  of  the  representative  members  and 
at  least  one  appointed  member  must  be  present. 

(7)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  make  regulations  with  respect  to 
the  proceedings  and  meetings  of  Trade  Boards,  including  the  method 
of  voting ;  but  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act  and  to  any  reg- 
ulations so  made  Trade  Boards  may  regulate  their  proceedings  in 
such  manner  as  they  think  fit. 

12.  Establishment  of  District  Trade  Committees 

(i)  A  Trade  Board  may  establish  district  trade  committees  con- 
sisting partly  of  members  of  the  Trade  Board  and  partly  of  persons 
not  being  members  of  the  Trade  Board  but  representing  employers 
or  workers  engaged  in  the  trade  and  constituted  in  accordance  with 
regulations  made  for  the  purpose  by  the  Board  of  Trade  and  acting 
for  such  area  as  the  Trade  Board  may  determine. 

(2)  Provisions  shall  be  made  by  the  regulations  for  at  least  one 
appointed  member  acting  as  a  member  of  each  district  trade  com- 
mittee, and  for  the  equal  representation  of  local  employers  and  local 


SWEATED  LABOUR  257 

workers  on  the  committee,  and  for  the  representation  of  home 
workers  thereon  in  the  case  of  any  trade  in  which  a  considerable 
proportion  of  home  workers  are  engaged  in  the  district,  and  also  for 
the  appointment  of  a  standing  sub-committee  to  consider  applica- 
tions for  special  minimum  piece-rates  and  complaints  made  to  the 
Trade  Board  under  this  Act,  and  for  the  reference  of  any  applications 
or  complaints  to  that  sub-committee. 

(3)  A  Trade  Board  may  refer  to  a  district  trade  committee  for 
their  report  and  recommendations  any  matter  which  they  think  it 
expedient  so  to  refer,  and  may  also,  if  they  think  fit,  delegate  to  a 
district  trade  committee  any  of  their  powers  and  duties  under  this 
Act,  other  than  their  power  and  duty  to  fix  a  minimum  time-rate 
or  general  minimum  piece-rate. 

(4)  Where  a  district  trade  committee  has  been  established  for 
any  area,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  committee  to  recommend  to 
the  Trade  Board  minimum  time-rates  and,  so  far  as  they  think  fit, 
general  minimum  piece-rates,  applicable  to  the  trade  in  that  area, 
and  no  such  minimum  rate  of  wages  fixed  under  this  Act  and  no 
variation  or  cancellation  of  such  a  rate  shall  have  effect  within  that 
area  unless  either  the  rate  or  the  variation  or  cancellation  thereof, 
as  the  case  may  be,  has  been  recommended  by  the  district  trade 
committee,  or  an, opportunity  has  been  given  to  the  committee  to 
report  thereon  to  the  Trade  Board,  and  the  Trade  Board  have 
considered  the  report  (if  any)  made  by  the  committee. 

ij.  Appointed  Members  of  Trade  Boards 

(i)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  appoint  such  number  of  persons 
(including  women)  as  they  think  fit  to  be  appointed  members  of 
Trade  Boards. 

(2)  Such  of  the  appointed  members  of  Trade  Boards  shall  act 
on  each  Trade  Board  or  district  trade  committee  as  may  be  directed 
by  the  Board  of  Trade,  and,  in  the  case  of  a  Trade  Board  for  a 
trade  in  which  women  are  largely  employed,  at  least  one  of  the 
appointed  members  acting  shall  be  a  woman : 


258  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Provided  that  the  number  of  appointed  members  acting  on  the 
same  Trade  Board,  or  the  same  district  trade  committee,  at  the  same 
time,  shall  be  less  than  half  the  total  number  of  members  repre- 
senting employers  and  members  representing  workers. 

Appointment  of  Officers  and  Other  Provisions  for 
enforcing  act 

14.  Appointment  of  Officers 

(i)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  appoint  such  officers  as  they 
think  necessary  for  the  purpose  of  investigating  any  complaints 
and  otherw^ise  securing  the  proper  observance  of  this  Act,  and  any 
ofBcers  so  appointed  shall  act  under  the  directions  of  the  Board  of 
Trade,  or,  if  the  Board  of  Trade  so  determine,  under  the  directions 
of  any  Trade  Board. 

(2)  The  Board  of  Trade  may  also,  in  lieu  of  or  in  addition  to 
appointing  any  officers  under  the  provisions  of  this  section,  if  they 
think  fit,  arrange  with  any  other  Government  department  for  as- 
sistance being  given  in  carrying  this  Act  into  effect,  either  generally 
or  in  any  special  cases,  by  officers  of  that  Department  whose  duties 
bring  them  into  relation  with  any  trade  to  which  this  Act  applies. 

i^.  Poivers  of  Officers 

(i)  Any  officer  appointed  by  the  Board  of  Trade  under  this 
Act,  and  any  officer  of  any  Government  department  for  the  time 
being  assisting  in  carrying  this  Act  into  effect,  shall  have  power 
for  the  performance  of  his  duties  — 

(a)  to  require  the  production  of  wages  sheets  or  other  record 
of  wages  by  an  employer,  and  records  of  payments  made 
to  outworkers  by  persons  giving  out  work,  and  to  inspect 
and  examine  the  same  and  copy  any  material  part  'thereof ; 
if)  to  require  any  person  giving  out  work  and  any  outworker 
to  give  any  information  which  it  is  in  his  power  to  give 
with  respect  to  the  names  and  addresses  of  the  persons 


SWEATED  LABOUR  259 

to  whom  the  work  is  given  out  or  from  whom  the  work 
is  received,  as  the  case  may  be,  and  with  respect  to  the 
payments  to  be  made  for  the  work  ; 
(r)  at  all  reasonable  times  to  enter  any  factory  or  workshop  and 
any  place  used  for  giving  out  work  to  outworkers ;    and 
(({)  to  inspect  and  copy  any  material  part  of  any  list  of  out- 
workers kept  by  an  employer  or  person  giving  out  work 
to  outworkers. 
(2)  If  any  person  fails  to  furnish  the  means  required  by  an 
ofificer  as  necessary  for  any  entry  or  inspection  or  the  exercise  of 
his  powers  under  this  section,  or  if  any  person  hinders  or  molests 
any  ofificer  in  the  exercise  of  the  powers  given  by  this  section,  or 
refuses  to  produce  any  document  or  give  any  information  which 
any  ofificer  requires  him  to  produce  or  give  under  the  powers  given 
by  this  section,  that  person  shall  be  liable  on  summary  conviction 
in  respect  of  each  offence  to  a  fine  not  exceeding  five  pounds ;  and, 
if  any  person  produces  any  wages  sheet,  or  record  of  wages,  or 
record  of  payments,  or  any  list  of  outworkers  to  any  ofificer  acting 
in  the  exercise  of  the  powers  given  by  this  section,  knowing  the 
same  to  be  false,  or  furnishes  any  information  to  any  such  ofificer 
knowing  the  same  to  be  false,  he  shall  be  liable,  on  summary 
conviction,  to  a  fine  not  exceeding  twenty  pounds,  or  to  imprison- 
ment for  a  term  not  exceeding  three  months,  with  or  without  hard 
labour. 


16.    Officers  to  Produce  Cert iji cat es  w/ien  Required 

Every  ofificer  appointed  by  the  Board  of  Trade  under  this  Act, 
and  eveiy  ofificer  of  any  Government  Department  for  the  time 
being  assisting  in  carrying  this  Act  into  effect,  shall  be  furnished 
by  the  Board  or  Department  with  a  certificate  of  his  appointment, 
and  when  acting  under  any  or  exercising  any  power  conferred  upon 
him  by  this  Act  shall,  if  so  required,  produce  the  said  certificate  to 
any  person  or  persons  affected. 


26o  BRITISH   SOCIAL   POLITICS 

77.  Power  to  take  and  conduct  Proceediftgs 

(i)  Any  ofBcer  appointed  by  the  Board  of  Trade  under  this 
Act,  and  any  officer  of  any  Government  Department  for  the  time 
being  assisting  in  carrying  this  Act  into  effect,  shall  have  power  in 
pursuance  of  any  special  or  general  directions  of  the  Board  of 
Trade  to  take  proceedings  under  this  Act,  and  a  Trade  Board  may 
also  take  any  such  proceedings  in  the  name  of  any  officer  appointed 
by  the  Board  of  Trade  for  the  time  being  acting  under  the  direc- 
tions of  the  Trade  Board  in  pursuance  of  this  Act,  or  in  the  name 
of  their  secretary  or  any  of  their  officers  authorised  by  them. 

(2)  Any  officer  appointed  by  the  Board  of  Trade  under  this 
Act,  or  any  officer  of  any  Government  Department  for  the  time 
being  assisting  in  carrying  this  Act  into  effect,  and  the  secretary 
of  a  Trade  Board,  or  any  officer  of  a  Trade  Board  authorised  for 
the  purpose,  may,  although  not  a  counsel  or  solicitor  or  law  agent, 
prosecute  or  conduct  before  a  court  of  summary  jurisdiction  any 
proceedings  arising  under  this  Act. 

Supplemental 
18.  Regulations  as  to  Jfode  0/ giving  Notice 

(i)  The  Board  of  Trade  shall  make  regulations  as  to  the  notice 
to  be  given  of  any  matter  under  this  Act,  with  a  view  to  bringing 
the  matter  of  which  notice  is  to  be  given  so  far  as  practicable  to 
the  knowledge  of  persons  affected. 

(2)  Every  occupier  of  a  factory  or  workshop,  or  of  any  place 
used  for  giving  out  work  to  outworkers,  shall,  in  manner  directed 
by  regulations  under  this  section,  fix  any  notices  in  his  factory  or 
workshop  or  the  place  used  for  giving  out  work  to  outworkers 
which  he  may  be  required  to  fix  by  the  regulations,  and  shall  give 
notice  in  any  other  manner,  if  required  by  the  regulations,  to  the 
persons  employed  by  him  of  any  matter  of  which  he  is  required 
to  give  notice  under  the  regulations  : 


SWEATED  LABOUR  261 

If  the  occupier  of  a  factory  or  workshop,  or  of  any  place  used 
for  giving  out  work  to  outworkers,  fails  to  comply  with  this  j^rovi- 
sion,  he  shall  be  liable  on  summary  conviction  in  respect  of  each 
offence  to  a  fine  not  exceeding  forty  shillings. 

ig.  Regulations  to  he  laid  before  Parliament 

Regulations  made  under  this  Act  shall  be  laid  as  soon  as  possi- 
ble before  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  and,  if  either  House  within 
the  next  forty  days  after  the  regulations  have  been  laid  before  that 
House  resolve  that  all  or  any  of  the  regulations  ought  to  be  an- 
nulled, the  regulations  shall,  after  the  date  of  the  resolution,  be  of 
no  effect,  without  prejudice  to  the  validity  of  anything  done  in  the 
meantime  thereunder  or  to  the  making  of  any  new  regulations.  If 
one  or  more  of  a  set  of  regulations  are  annulled,  the  Board  of 
Trade  may,  if  they  think  fit,  withdraw  the  whole  set. 

20.   Interchange  of  Powers  between  Government  Departments 

(i)  His  Majesty  may,  by  Order  in  Council,  direct  that  any 
powers  to  be  exercised  or  duties  to  be  performed  by  the  Board  of 
Trade  under  this  Act  shall  be  exercised  or'  performed  generally,  or 
in  any  special  cases  or  class  of  cases,  by  a  Secretary  of  State,  and, 
while  any  such  Order  is  in  force,  this  Act  shall  apply  as  if,  so  far 
as  is  necessary  to  give  effect  to  the  Order,  a  Secretary  of  State 
were  substituted  for  the  Board  of  Trade. 

(2)  Any  Order  in  Council  under  this  section  may  be  varied  or 
revoked  by  any  subsequent  Order  in  Council. 

21.  Expenses 

There  shall  be  paid  out  of  moneys  provided  by  Parliament  — 
(i)  Any  expenses,  up  to  an  amount  sanctioned  by  the  Treas- 
ury, which  may  be  incurred  with  the  authority  or  sanc- 
tion of  the  Board  of  Trade  by  Trade  Boards  or  their 
committees  in  carrying  into  effect  this  Act ;    and 


262  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(2)  To  appointed  members  and  secretaries  of  Trade  Boards 

and  to  officers  appointed  by  the  Board  of  Trade  under 
this  Act  such  remuneration  and  expenses  as  may  be 
sanctioned  by  the  Treasury ;    and 

(3)  To  representative  members  of  Trade  Boards  and  mem- 

bers (other  than  appointed  members)  of  district  trade 
committees  any  expenses  (including  compensation  for 
loss  of  time),  up  to  an  amount  sanctioned  by  the  Treas- 
ury, which  may  be  incurred  by  them  in  the  performance 
of  their  duties  as  such  members  ;    and 

(4)  Any  expenses,  up  to  an  amount  sanctioned  by  the  Treas- 

ury, which  may  be  incurred  by  the  Board  of  Trade  in 
making  inquiries,  or  procuring  information,  or  taking 
any  preliminary  steps  with  respect  to  the  application  of 
this  Act  to  any  trade  to  which  the  Act  does  not  apply, 
including  the  expenses  of  obtaining  a  Provisional  Order, 
or  promoting  any  Bill  to  confirm  any  Provisional  Order 
made  under,  or  in  pursuance  of,  the  provisions  of  this 
Act. 

22.   Title  and  Cotnmencenie/it 

(i)  This  Act  may  be  cited  as  the  Trade  Boards  Act,  1909. 

(2)  This  Act  shall  come  into  operation  on  the  first  day  of 
January  nineteen  hundred  and  ten. 

Schedule 
Trades  to  which  the  Act  applies  luithoid  Provisional  Order 

1.  Ready-made  and  wholesale  bespoke  tailoring  and  any  other 
branch  of  tailoring  in  which  the  Board  of  Trade  consider  that  the 
system  of  manufacture  is  generally  similar  to  that  prevailing  in 
the  wholesale  trade. 

2.  The  making  of  boxes  or  parts  thereof  made  wholly  or  par- 
tially of  paper,  cardboard,  chip,  or  similar  material. 

3.  Machine-made  lace  and  net  finishing  and  mending  or  darning 
operations  of  lace  curtain  finishing. 

4.  Hammered  and  dollied  or  tommied  chain-making. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM 

[An  early  obvious  phase  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  was  the 
remarkably  sudden  growth  of  manufacturing  towns  and  cities,  out 
of  all  proportion  to  the  increase  of  the  rural  population.  And  this 
rush  of  thousands  of  countrymen  to  the  cities  at  once  precipi- 
tated the  gravest  municipal  problems.  Properly  to  house  the  new 
multitudes  was  no  easy  task.  The  meanest,  ugliest  dwellings  were 
hastily  constructed ;  dingy  tenements  arose ;  new  sections  were 
built  up  without  provision  for  open  spaces  or  parks  —  in  fact, 
without  plan  or  design  of  any  sort,  save  to  house  the  working 
classes  with  the  least  possible  outlay  of  time  and  money.  A  Ruskin 
might  cry  out  against  the  ugliness,  the  filth,  and  the  dirt  of  a  grow- 
ing industrial  town  of  the  mid-century  and  against  the  disease, 
even  the  vice  and  crime  that  these  engendered  —  those  who  owned 
the  land  and  had  the  capital  for  building  must  profit  to  the.  full 
themselves,  and  besides,  the  workingmen  were  too  poor  to  afford 
anything  else. 

Overcrowding  became  the  rule  of  the  day  and  the  cause  of 
many  municipal  ills.  In  1901  the  Census  Commissioners  described 
as  overcrowded  392,000  tenements  in  which  2,667,000  persons 
were  living,  that  is  to  say,  8.2  per  cent  of  the  whole  population  of 
England  and  Wales.  In  the  industrial  towns  of  the  United  King- 
dom "  more  than  half  a  million  people  live  in  dwellings  of  only  one 
room.  To-day  in  London,  with  all  its  immense  wealth,  nearly  two- 
thirds  of  the  whole  population  live  in  dwellings  of  not  more  than 
four  rooms  in  all,  while  in  Glasgow,  famous  for  its  splendid  mu- 
nicipal enterprises,   no  less   than   one-fifth  of  the  people  live  in 

26^, 


264  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

one-room  dwellings,  and  more  than  half  the  people  have  houses  of 
not  more  than  two  rooms.'"  ^ 

To  deal  with  the  problem,  several  steps  must  be  taken.  In  the 
first  place,  the  slums  and  older  insanitary  dwellings  in  the  heart  of 
the  town  must  be  removed,  and  the  newer  tenements  must  be  con- 
structed with  an  eye  to  health,  comfort,  and  beauty.  Open  spaces 
and  parks,  places  for  real  sunlight,  playgrounds  and  recreation 
centres,  must  be  provided.  Then,  in  the  second  place,  there  must 
be  adequate  control  of  urban  growth,  so  that  as  the  town  stretches 
out  into  the  country  the  workingmen's  dwellings  may  not  be  dreary, 
monotonous  piles  of  brick,  but  pleasant  cottages  amply  relieved  by 
trees  and  shrubs  and  grass.  If  these  steps  are  to  be  taken,  it  is 
essential  also  that  every  municipality  should  have  plenty  of  cheap 
land  at  its  disposal  and  likewise  cheap  and  rapid  transit  facilities. 

Then,  too,  in  the  United  Kingdom  the  problem  has  been  compli- 
cated still  further  by  the  fact  that  the  ownership  of  the  land  in  the 
country  as  well  as  in  the  city  has  been  in  the  hands  of  the  few.^ 
The  peasant  has  not  had  a  direct,  personal  interest  in  the  land, 
and  the  consequence  has  been  to  draw  him  too  readily  to  the  city 
and  to  hinder  any  urban  resident  from  settling  in  the  countr)^  To 
break  down  land  monopoly  everywhere  must  be  a  policy  of  any 
government  bent  upon  social  reform. 

In  1884  an  important  Housing  Commission  was  appointed  with 
Sir  Charles  Dilke,  an  enthusiastic  reformer,  as  Chairman,  and  with 
such  members  as  King  Edward  VII,  then  Prince  of  Wales,  Cardinal 
Manning,  and  Lord  Salisbury.  Its  exhaustive  report  made  clear, 
among  other  things,  that  pauperism  and  crime,  drunkenness,  physi- 
cal degeneration,  disease,  and  high  death  rates  were  all  bound  up 
with  the  problem  of  housing.  Several  definite  recommendations  of 
the  Commission  were  embodied  in  the  Housing  of  the  Working 
Classes  Act  of  1890  and  in  subsequent  legislation. 

1  Percy  Alden,  Democratic  England,  p.  170.  Cf.  also  Mr.  Seebohm  Rowntree's 
book,  "  Poverty,"  and  the  investigations  of  Mr;  Charles  Booth  among  the  poor  of 
London.  2  cf.  supra,  pp.  5,  6. 


THE  HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  265 

But  it  was  not  until  1909  that  serious  attempts  were  made  to 
grapple  with  practically  all  forms  of  the  housing  problem.  It 
was  against  the  land  monopoly  that  many  provisions  of  the  cele- 
brated Lloyd  George  Budget  ^  of  that  year  were  directed,  notably 
the  tax  on  the  unearned  increment  and  the  proposals  for  land 
development. 

Already,  in  1907,  the  Liberal  Government  had  succeeded  in  se- 
curing the  enactment  of  an  important  Small  Holdings  and  Allot- 
ments Bill.^  In  1909,  in  addition  to  the  Budget,  a  Housing  and 
Town  Planning  Act  and  a  Development  Act  were  passed. 

The  Housing  and  Town  Planning  Bill  was  introduced  on  Feb- 
ruary 17,  1909,  and  when  it  reached  second  reading  on  April  5, 
Mr.  John  Burns,  President  of  the  Local  Government  Board,  said 
{Extract  48)  that  it  was  an  almost  exact  reproduction  of  a  Bill 
considered  in  Grand  Committee  in  1908.  It  proposed  that  the 
existing  law  which  enabled  local  authorities  to  provide  new  houses 
should  be  obligatory,  and  increased  facilities  would  be  given  for 
the  acquisition  of  land  for  housing  on  small-holding  terms.  Loans 
would  be  obtainable  for  periods  up  to  eighty  years  at  the  minimum 
rate  of  interest  possible,  and  the  Housing  Acts  would  be  consoli- 
dated into  one.  The  law  with  regard  to  closing  orders  and  demoli- 
tion of  buildings  unfit  for  habitation  would  be  strengthened  and 
simplified,  and  landlords  would  be  required  to  keep  holdings  in  all 
respects  reasonably  fit  for  human  habitation.  As  to  town  planning, 
there  was  no  fear  that  open  spaces  and  parks  would  be  affected. 
The  measure  provided,  moreover,  that  every  county  council  should 
have  a  medical  officer  devoting  all  his  abilities  and  serv-ices  to  pub- 
lic health  and  sanitation ;  and  underground  and  cellar  dwellings 
and  back-to-back  houses  would  be  abolished. 

1  Cf.  infra,  ch.  viii. 

2  This  measure  "  to  consolidate  the  enactments  with  respect  to  small  holdings  and 
allotments  in  England  and  Wales"'  (7  Edw.  7,  ch.  54,  August  28,  1907)  should  be 
read  in  conjunction  with  the  various  Irish  Land  Laws  and  with  the  Small  Land- 
holders Act  for  Scotland  (i  &  2  Geo.  5,ch.  49,  December  16,  1911).  All  these  Acts, 
in  one  way  or  another,  illustrate  social  politics,  but  lack  of  space  has  precluded  their 
incorporation  in  this  volume. 


266  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Mr.  Lyttelton,  in  behalf  of  the  Opposition,  gave  general  support 
to  the  Bill,  though  he  complained  that  it  was  largely  "  legislation 
by  reference,"  and  he  did  not  think  the  Local  Government  Board 
should  coerce  a  county  council,  or  that  the  provisions  as  to  com- 
pulsory purchase  were  sound.  Moreover,  the  Local  Government 
Board  should  have  an  increased  staff  to  work  the  Bill.  Two 
Lmionist  members  for  rural  constituencies,  Mr.  Lane-Fox  and 
Mr.  Hicks- Beach,  respectively,  moved  and  seconded  an  amendment 
declining  to  impose  the  cost  of  housing,  a  natural  service,  on  local 
rates,  but  eventually  this  was  rejected  by  128  to  20  after  closure, 
and  the  second  reading  agreed  to. 

The  Housing  and  Town  Planning  Bill  was  disposed  of  in  the 
Commons  on  August  30  and  31,  after  various  Opposition  members 
had  unsuccessfully  moved  amendments  restricting  the  powers  con- 
ferred on  the  Local  Government  Board,  altering  the  proposed 
land  purchase  procedure,  saving  lands  held  by  railway  companies 
and  similar  undertakings  from  compulsory  purchase,  and  prevent- 
ing local  authorities  from  extending  their  schemes  outside  their 
own  jurisdiction.  A  clause  requiring  local  authorities  to  hold  a 
quinquennial  survey  and  inspection  of  small  dwelling-houses  and 
register  the  results,  carried  against  the  Government  in  Grand  Com- 
mittee, was  debated  independently  of  party  lines  and  struck  out 
by  121  to  95. 

In  the  House  of  Lords  the  Bill  was  generally  welcomed  on  its 
second  reading  on  September  1 4,  when  Earl  Beauchamp  explained 
the  measure  in  detail  {^Extract  4g).  The  Earl  of  Onslow  thought 
there  would  be  too  much  governmental  supervision  and  insisted 
upon  the  dangers  of  bureaucracy  {Extract  50).  The  fate  of  the 
quinquennial  survey  clause  was  deplored  by  the  Bishop  of  Birming- 
ham {Extract  J i)  and  by  the  Primate. 

But  the  Lords,  already  in  conflict  with  the  Commons  over  the 
Budget,  began  to  perceive  dangers  in  the  Housing  and  Town  Plan- 
ning Bill,  and  drastic  alterations  were  proposed  that  materially 
weakened  the  measure.    Of  the  changes  effected  in  Committee 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  267 

Stage,  September  22-23,  the  most  important  (i)  substituted  a 
costlier  plan  of  land  purchase  borrowed  from  the  Port  of  London 
Act ;  (2)  subjected  housing  orders  to  the  control  of  either  House ; 
(3)  permitted  back-to-back  houses  if  the  medical  officer  of  health  cer- 
tified their  ventilation  satisfactory ;  (4)  exempted  the  land  of  rail- 
way and  other  statutory  companies  from  compulsory  purchase  under 
the  Bill ;  (5)  relieved  the  County  and  County  Borough  Councils 
from  the  proposed  compulsion  by  the  Local  Government  Board ; 
and  (6)  interfered  with  the  town  planning  clauses  by  setting  up 
the  machinery  of  Provisional  Orders  which  might  be  dealt  with 
and  defeated  by  either  House. 

.  The  Bill  was  further  amended  by  the  Lords  on  Report  on 
October  4,  in  a  manner  displeasing  to  its  supporters.  Some  feel- 
ing was  excited  by  the  attitude  of  the  Duke  of  Northumberland 
towards  the  proposals  made  to  secure  the  fitness  of  cottages  for 
habitation  and  the  closing  of  insanitary  dwellings,  inasmuch  as  cer- 
tain miners'  cottages  on  his  estate  at  Walbottle,  Northumberland, 
leased  to  a  mining  company,  had  been  closed  as  insanitary  by  order 
of  the  County  Bench.  "  Walbottle  "  was  heard  of  for  some  time 
afterwards  at  Liberal  meetings.  The  Bill  was  further  amended 
very  considerably  on  third  reading  a  week  later. 

The  measure,  as  it  finally  received  the  royal  assent  on  Decem- 
ber 3,  is  a  very  long  and  technical  one,  but  a  number  of  its  most 
salient  provisions  are  given  as  Extract  32. 

The  Development  Bill,  the  success  of  which  had  been  repeatedly 
linked  with  that  of  the  Budget,^  was  introduced  on  August  26  and 
reached  second  reading  on  September  6.  It  provided :  (i)  That 
grants  on  loans  might  be  made  by  the  Treasury,  aided  by  an 
Advisory  Board,  towards  forestry,  agriculture,  rural  industries  and 
transport,  harbours,  canals,  fisheries,  and  other  modes  of  economic 
development.  The  fund  would  be  provided  {a)  by  annual  Parlia- 
mentary grants;   {V)   by  five   annual  grants,  each  of  ;!<^5oo,ooo 

1  The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  had  referred  to  its  purposes  in  his  Budget 
speech  on  April  29,  1909.   Cf,  infra,  Extract  ^8,  pp.  366-369. 


268  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

charged  on  the  Consolidated  Fund ;  (r)  by  interest  and,  in  certain 
cases,  profits  on  grants  or  loans.  (2)  It  constituted  a  Road  Board 
of  one  paid  and  four  unpaid  members,  which  would  either  itself 
construct  new  loans  or  make  grants  and  loans  to  the  highway 
authorities  for  the  purpose.  Its  own  roads  would  primarily  be 
motor  roads  with  no  speed  limit,  and  it  would  have  compulsory 
powers  of  acquisition  not  only  of  land  for  new  roads,  but  of  land 
for  220  ft.  on  each  side,  of  which  it  would  get  the  increment.  The 
expenses  would  be  covered  partly  by  this  and  by  charges  on  non- 
motor  traffic  on  the  new  roads  or  for  private  roads  through  this  strip, 
and  partly  by  the  duties  on  motor  spirit  and  motor  cars.  Its  work 
was  to  have  reference  to  the  state  and  prospects  of  employment. 

Lord  Robert  Cecil  bitterly  opposed  the  second  reading  (^Ex- 
trad  jj),  declaring  that  the  Bill  would  produce  political  corrup- 
tion and  that  it  exhibited  megalomania.  Mr.  David  Lloyd  George, 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  replied  to  Lord  Robert  in  a 
characteristically  caustic  speech  (^Extract  ^4) ;  and  subsequently 
Mr.  G.  N.  Barnes  expressed  an  interesting  Labour  view  of  the 
matter  (^Extract  55).  Eventually  the  second  reading  was  carried 
after  closure  by  137  to  17,  and  the  necessary  financial  resolution 
was  also  carried  after  the  defeat  by  105  to  6  of  an  amendment 
limiting  the  grant  of  ^500,000  to  one  year. 

Stormy  scenes  marked  all  the  later  stages  of  the  Development 
Bill  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Conservative  discontent  with  its 
provisions  was  obvious.  On  the  Report  Stage,  on  October  7, 
Unionists  unsuccessfully  moved  amendments  (i)  to  secure  greater 
Parliamentary  control  over  the  Development  Commission  by  abol- 
ishing the  annual  grant  of  ^500,000  out  of  the  Consolidated  Fund  ; 
(2)  to  limit  the  amounts  payable  in  a  year  to  England,  Scotland, 
and  Ireland  respectively  to  80,  1 1,  and  9  per  cent  of  the  total  sum 
advanced ;  (3)  to  secure  greater  independence  for  the  Commis- 
sioners ;  (4)  to  restrict  the  number  of  the  members  of  the  Road 
Board  to  five;  (5)  to  deprive  the  Board  of  power  to  construct 
new  roads.    The  Bill  was  then  read  a  third  time. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  269 

In  the  Lords,  second  reading  was  passed  on  October  14,  after 
an  excellent  summary  of  the  general  principles  underlying  the 
measure  by  Earl  Carrington,  President  of  the  Board  of  Agricul- 
ture {Extract  ^6).  Efforts  were  made  to  amend  the  Bill,  but  the 
Commons  declined  to  accept  any  amendments,  and  the  Lords 
yielded.  The  Bill  received  the  royal  assent  on  December  3,  and 
is  given  below  as  Extract  57.] 


Extract  48 

GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  THE  HOUSING  AND  TOWN 
PLANNING   BILL 

{Mr.  John  Bums,  President  of  the  Local  Govenune/it  Board, 
Commons,  April  j,  iQog) 

Mr.  Burns  ^ :  The  Bill  that  we  ask  the  second  reading  of  to- 
day is  the  Government's  Housing  and  Town  Planning  Bill,  which 
was  read  a  second  time  on  May  12  of  last  year.  After  the  Bill 
received  its  second  reading,  it  was  committed  to  the  Grand  Com- 
mittee upstairs.  This  Bill  was  most  favourably  received  both  in  this 
House  on  the  second  reading  and  in  the  country  both  before  and 
since,  and  for  twenty-three  days  it  stood  upstairs  the  ordeal  of  criti- 
cism and  improvement.  After  the  twenty-three  days  upstairs,  the 
Bill  was  reported  to  the  House  of  Commons  on  December  3  last, 
but  the  Government  considered,  mainly  in  deference  to  the  general 
view  that  was  then  expressed,  and  because  of  the  demands  made 
upon  its  time  for  other  measures  that  had  an  equal  claim,  that  it 
was  impracticable  to  pass  such  an  important  Bill  last  Session  ;  and 
the  Prime  Minister  promised  that,  as  the  Bill  was  not  passed  last 
year,  it  should  be  re-introduced  as  early  as  possible  in  the  Session 
of  1909.    This  has  now  been  done,  and,  I  submit,  in  extension  of 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  3,  col.  733  sqq. 


270  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  Prime  Minister's  promise,  tliat  the  new  Bill  which  we  submit 
to-day  is  almost  an  exact  reproduction  of  last  year's  Bill,  except 
those  Amendments  which  were  added  in  the  Committee,  with  a  few 
deletions,  which  were  effected  on  the  initiative  of  the  Government 
and  generally  approved  by  the  Committee  upstairs.  .  .  . 

The  main  and  essential  feature  of  the  Bill  is  that  Part  III  of  the 
Housing  of  the  Working  Classes  Act,  1890,  which  enables  local 
authorities  to  provide  new  houses  for  the  working  classes,  and 
which  is  now  only  adoptive,  shall  be  put  in  force  throughout  the 
country.  This  is  an  important,  a  serious  and  necessary,  and,  I  be- 
lieve, a  practical  step  that  housing  reformers  have  been  asking  for 
for  some  years. 

Beyond  that  the  Bill  gives  increased  facilities  for  the  acquisition 
of  land  for  housing  the  working  classes  on  small  holdings  terms. 
Such  conditions  under  which  land  can  be  acquired  for  small  hold- 
ings have  been  so  recently  before  both  Houses  of  Parliament  —  and 
have  secured,  I  believe,  the  cordial  assent  of  both  branches  of  Par- 
liament ;  and  it  is,  at  any  rate,  equally  necessary  that  the  acquisi- 
tion of  land  for  what  is  equally  necessary  for  the  improvement  of 
the  country,  namely,  land  for  the  housing  of  the  working  classes, 
should  be  under  similar  conditions  —  that  it  is  not  necessary  for 
me  to  labour  those  conditions  at  any  length. 

The  third  improvement  is  that  the  provisions  in  this  Bill  enable 
loans  to  be  obtained  through  the  Public  Works  Loans  Commis- 
sioners for  periods  up  to  eighty  years,  with  the  minimum  rate  of 
interest  possible,  and  I  think  desirable. 

The  fourth  provision  is  that  not  only  will  the  new  Bill,  when  it 
becomes  an  Act,  be  better  enforced  by  improved  machinery  than 
the  existing  Acts  now  are,  but  existing  Acts  will  be  embodied  in  this 
Bill ;  and  at  the  end  of  the  Session  the  whole  of  the  Housing  Acts, 
consolidated  into  one  intelligible  and  practical  working  measure, 
will,  I  trust,  enable  the  housing  of  the  working  classes  to  be  secured 
by  machinery  that  will  act  more  easily,  more  promptly,  and  more 
efficiently,  and  at  less  cost,  than  now  prevails. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  2/1 

The  fifth  point  is  that  this  Bill  strengthens  and  simplifies  the 
present  law  as  regards  closing  orders,  and  the  demolition  of  in- 
sanitary property  unfit  for  human  habitation. 

The  sixth  point  of  the  Bill  is  that  it  extends,  in  Clauses  1 4  and 
15,  to  houses  of  a  higher  rental  value  than  at  present,  an  implied 
condition  in  the  contract  for  letting  that  the  houses  are  fit  for 
human  habitation.  It  is  not  only  that  we  should  be  content  with 
the  present  law  which  says  that  when  a  landlord  lets  a  house 
or  tenement  to  an  intending  occupant,  at  the  time  of  entry  for 
occupation  the  house  shall  be  fit  for  human  habitation.  What  we 
want  is  to  maintain  that  house  in  a  condition  fit  for  human  habita- 
tion so  long  as  human  beings  reside  therein.  Small  though  that 
point  is,  if  vigorously  enforced,  which  we  believe  under  the  ma- 
chinery of  this  Bill  it  will  be,  that  small  but  necessary  point  will, 
I  trust,  create  a  revolution  in  the  minor  conditions  of  the  house, 
especially  in  our  large  towns  and  cities.  Clause  15  throws  upon 
the  landlord  the  responsibility  of  keeping  the  house  reasonably  fit. 
Now  all  these  very  objects  are  secured  and  achieved  by  the  process 
of  machinery  set  forth  in  this  Bill.  So  far  as  the  House  is  con- 
cerned this  Bill  is  a  distinct  advance  on  the  existing  law.  These  pro- 
posals are  moderate,  reasonable,  practical,  and  nothing  has  given 
the  Government  greater  pleasure  than  the  general  way  in  which 
they  have  been  accepted,  so  far  as  the  House  is  concerned.  I 
cordially  commend  that  portion  of  the  Bill  to  the  House. 

The  next  portion  of  the  Bill  is  that  portion  which  deals  with  town 
planning.  This  is  a  new  department  in  the  legislation  of  this  country. 
I  regret  that  it  has  come  so  late.  No  one  can  go  through  the  East 
End  of  London,  or  to  places  like  Liverpool,  Leeds,  Manchester, 
and  Glasgow,  and  see  the  effect  on  the  physique,  morale,  happi- 
ness, and  comfort  of  men,  women,  and  children,  through  lack  of 
some  such  condition  as  this  one  hundred,  or  at  least  fifty,  years  ago, 
but  will  come  to  one  definite  conclusion,  that,  late  though  it  is,  it 
is  better  late  than  never,  and  that  the  House  of  Commons  should 
not  lose  this  opportunity  of  giving  to  communities,  especially  to 


272  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

growing  and  industrial  communities,  the  opportunity  of  consciously 
shaping  their  own  development  in  a  better  way  than  has  occurred 
in  the  past.  I  have  lately  been  spending  week  ends  in  visiting 
thirty  or  forty  unemployed  works  in  the  East  End  of  London,  par- 
ticularly in  close  proximity  to  open  spaces,  and  if  Members  who 
do  not  know  the  East  End  of  London  had  been  with  me,  I  could 
have  pointed  out  in  a  practical  way  how,  even  close  to  places  like 
West  Ham  Park,  Hainault  Forest,  the  western  portion  of  Epping 
Forest,  and  Hackney  Marshes,  and  by  the  River  Lea  and  other 
places,  if  we  had  had  this  Bill  forty  or  fifty  years  ago,  the  amenities 
of  these  parks  and  open  spaces  could  have  been  enormously  added 
to  by  maintaining  a  balance  between  them  and  the  houses  built 
in  their  neighbourhood.  It  is  not  fair  or  just  to  our  poor  that  in 
many  cases  you  build,  as  you  do,  close  by  a  river  or  a  canal, 
which  might  be  made  a  pleasurable  and  healthy  amenity  by  the 
adoption  of  a  proper  system  of  laying  out  roadways ;  it  is  not  fair, 
I  say,  that  streets  should  be  put  the  wrong  way  on,  that  roads 
should  be  formed  at  the  wrong  angle,  that  they  should  be  placed 
where  the  sun  rarely  reaches,  but  where  the  wind  does  always,  or 
where  ventilation  is  denied  them,  and  where  the  line  of  greatest 
resistance  is  pursued  in  neglecting  those  natural  and  physical  op- 
portunities which,  under  the  Town  Planning  Bill,  could  be  profitably 
exploited  for  the  whole  community  —  to  the  benefit  not  only  of 
the  present  generation,  but  particularly  of  children  who  are  cursed, 
many  of  them,  in  their  habitations  and  environment.  This  portion 
of  the  Bill  has  met  with  a  favourable  reception.  It  has  had  a  little 
criticism,  but  I  trust  that  before  June  the  measure,  the  town  plan- 
ning portion  of  it  particularly,  will  be  on  the  Statute  Book. 

I  come  to  one  or  two  portions  of  the  measure  which  have  been 
rather  misunderstood  or  unintentionally  misrepresented.  If  town 
planning  is  to  be  a  success,  as  we  all  agree  it  should  be,-  it  is 
essential  that  the  central  body  should  have  more  control  than  it 
now  has.  I  can  understand  some  hon.  Members  saying  that  what 
has  prevented  town  planning  in  the  past  has  been  where  special, 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  273 

personal,  or  local  interests  have  been  so  anxious  to  satisfy  prejudices 
or  selfish  objects  that  it  has  been  impossible  for  local  owners,  with 
a  local  authority  of  limited  views,  sometimes  consisting  not  always 
of  the  most  disinterested  personnel,  to  come  to  the  agreement  that 
would  be  arrived  at  if  the  central  authority  intervened.  And  it  is 
universally  admitted  on  both  sides  of  the  House  that  for  this  pur- 
pose the  Local  Government  Board  ought  to  have  more  power  to 
intervene,  first  by  way  of  local  inquiry,  secondly  by  making  sur- 
veys and  investigations,  separating  the  goats  from  the  sheep,  and 
seeing  that  the  community  do  not  suffer  because  litigious  owners 
or  prejudiced  councillors  happen  to  be  at  loggerheads,  not  about 
the  interests  of  the  locality  as  a  whole,  but  about  some  pettifogging 
local  or  personal  grievance  which  is  very  often  allowed  to  stand 
in  the  way  of  a  good  owner  developing  his  property,  or  of  public- 
spirited  companies  doing  the  right  thing  —  the  local  authorities  be- 
ing influenced,  as  alone  they  ought  to  be  influenced,  for  the  benefit 
of  the  community  they  serve.  We  think  that  the  Local  Government 
Board,  as  the  central  authority,  ought  to  exercise  a  wider  control, 
and  for  this  control  the  Department  has  taken  no  more  power 
than  is  essential  for  the  proper  purposes  of  this  Bill. 

Some  of  the  powers  of  this  Bill  have  been  misunderstood,  others 
have  been  exaggerated,  and  one  or  two  are  suspected  on  minor 
details.  May  I  say  to  all  who  do  not  agree  with  me  as  to  the  pro- 
posals of  this  Bill,  whether  as  to  parks  or  open  spaces,  roads  or 
other  points  of  detail,  that  they  will  find  the  Local  Government 
Board  as  amenable  and  susceptible  to  reason  and  advice  in  the 
Committee  of  this  House  as  they  were  in  Grand  Committee  up- 
stairs. It  would  be  ridiculous  if,  on  minor  points  in  a  Bill  like 
this,  we  should  be  suspected  of  dragging  in  proposals,  as  has  been 
represented,  to  grab  commons,  to  filch  open  spaces,  to  appropri- 
ate parks,  and,  generally  speaking,  not  to  rest  content  until  the 
houses  of  West  Ham  and  Poplar  are  in  the  middle  of  Kensington 
Gardens  or  in  the  centre  of  Wimbledon  Common,  ^'et,  that  is  the 
kind  of  representation  we  receive.    As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  people 


274  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

who  make  that  kind  of  suggestion  in  the  newspapers  forget  that  the 
Local  Government  Board  is  pre-eminently  a  body  more  concerned 
in  regard  to  parks  and  open  spaces  than  any  other  person  or 
authority  could  be  in  this  country.  First,  it  has  the  care  of  the 
public  health,  and  no  town  or  city  can  possess  health  without  open 
spaces  and  pleasant  environment.  Last  year  alone,  the  Local  Gov- 
ernment Board,  which  is  suspected  in  some  quarters  of  having 
designs  to  build  on  every  common,  on  every  open  space  or  com- 
monable piece  of  land,  sanctioned  ^300,000  for  the  purchase  of 
additional  parks  and  open  spaces.  When  it  is  suggested  that  we 
have  fell  designs  on  commons,  my  answer  is :  that  out  of  ^230,000 
spent  out  of  the  unemployed  fund  last  winter,  ^130,000  was  ex- 
pended in  adding  to  parks  and  open  spaces,  and  beautifying  those 
which  already  existed.  To  suggest  that  we  want  to  filch  commons 
and  run  away  with  parks  and  open  spaces  is  absurd.  What  dif- 
ferences there  are  between  my  Department  and  one  or  two  hon. 
Members  are  open  to  consideration  and  adjustment.  Of  course, 
I  do  not  hope  to  please  every  Member  whose  mind  is  filled  with 
open  spaces,  but  I  do  say  that  there  is  nothing  in  these  proposals 
but  what  one  can  come  to  an  agreement  upon. 

I  now  come  to  the  third  portion  of  the  Bill.  That  is  the  portion 
which  deals  with  the  medical  officers  of  health.  It  is  a  very  im- 
portant part  of  the  measure.  We  have  sixty-two  county  councils 
in  the  country,  and,  up  to  recently,  only  half  of  them  have  had 
medical  officers.  I  do  not  think  that  this  country,  which  for  the 
last  hundred  years  has  led  the  world  in  public  sanitation,  should 
remain  longer  under  the  reproach  of  not  having  in  every  county 
of  England  and  Wales  a  whole-time  medical  officer.  And  we  have 
decided  that  every  county  council  shall  have  a  whole-time  medical 
officer,  devoting  all  his  abilities  and  services  to  public  health  and 
sanitation.  Bearing  in  mind  the  special  provisions  of  this  Bill,  we 
also  say  that  this  in  itself,  especially  when  the  terms  and  condi- 
tions under  which  the  medical  officer  serves  are  to  be  approved  by 
the  Local  Government  Board,  should  give  some  satisfaction  to  the 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  275 

members  of  a  useful  and  honourable  profession,  which  has  a  right 
to  be  protected  against,  at  times,  the  capricious  local  interference 
which  prevents  them  from  doing  their  duty  to  the  body  politic  as 
well  as  they  ought  to  be  allowed  to  do  it.  .   .  . 

There  are  one  or  two  other  things  to  which  I  must  refer  before 
I  sit  down.  The  first  is  with  regard  to  underground  dwellings.  We 
are  taking  steps  to  abolish  underground  and  cellar  dwellings  alto- 
gether. Personal  and  public  opinion  in  the  last  few  years  has 
moved  rapidly,  and  the  proposals  of  the  Bill  practically  terminate 
underground  and  cellar  dwellings  for  human  habitation  for  the 
future.  We  are  also  seeking  to  obtain  power  to  prohibit  back-to- 
back  dwellings.  ["  Oh."]  I  notice  that  one  Member  of  the  House 
says  "  Oh."  That  confirms  the  fact,  perhaps,  that  representations 
as  to  back -to-back  houses  have  only  been  received  from  one  dis- 
trict. I  do  not  believe  that  back-to-back  houses  ought  to  exist  at 
all.  So  far  as  this  Bill  is  concerned  no  back-to-back  houses  are  to 
be  allowed  in  future.  And  we  are  supported  in  that  proposal,  I  see, 
in  a  little  handbill  entitled  "  Fresh  Air  and  Ventilation,"  published 
by  the  National  Association  for  the  Prevention  of  Consumption 
and  Other  Forms  of  Tuberculosis.  I  find  in  that  leaflet  they  say 
that  "  back-to-back  houses  and  cellar  tenements  are  unfit  for  human 
habitation."  And  that  is  our  view,  and  no  injustice  is  done  to  any 
community  or  to  any  owner  or  to  any  interest  when,  if  this  Bill  be 
passed,  we  say  that  no  more  back-to-back  houses  shall  be  allowed 
in  future.  If  we  wanted  arguments  against  back-to-back  houses, 
I  should  like,  if  time  permitted,  to  read  one  of  the  most  remarkable 
little  books  I  ever  read  dealing  with  the  state  of  the  poorer  classes 
in  great  towns.  This  little  book  is  the  substance  of  a  speech  de- 
livered in  the  House  of  Commons  by  Mr.  Robert  A.  Slaney,  a 
relative  of  the  late  Colonel  Kenyon-Slaney.  If  one  only  had  time 
to  read  this  little  book,  which  was  published  in  1840,  particularly  ^ 
with  that  part  dealing  with  the  consequences  and  the  effects  of 
back-to-back  houses,  I  think  we  should  carry  the  House  with  us. 
We  are  against  back-to-back  houses. 


2/6  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Mr.  Lupton  :  That  book  was  written  seventy  years  ago. 

Mr.  Burns  :  Yes,  but  the  same  rule  applies  now.  The  par- 
ticular town  dealt  with  in  this  little  book  now  labours  under  the 
disability  of  back-to-back  houses. 

Mr.  Lupton  :  And  that  town  has  the  second  lowest  death-rate 
in  the  kingdom. 

Mr.  Burns  :  Probably  it  would  have  been  better  if  the  town 
had  not  had  back-to-back  houses. 

Mr.  Speaker  :  I  must  ask  the  hon.  Member  from  Sleaford  not 
to  carry  on  a  conversation.    This  is  a  debate,  not  a  conversazione. 

Mr.  Burns  :  I  can  only  say  that  in  one  town  where  back-to-back 
houses  prevail  we  have  this  remarkable  result :  Whereas  the  average 
age  at  death  of  the  gentlemen  and  the  professional  classes  was  44, 
amongst  the  tradesmen  it  was  27,  and  amongst  operative  labourers' 
and  their  families  it  was  19  ;  that  is,  44  as  against  19.  My  medical 
advisers  advise  me  that  the  back-to-back  houses  were  responsible 
in  the  day  of  this  report  for  a  death-rate  of  43  per  1000  over  the 
town  as  a  whole,  and  an  infant  mortality  of  570  per  1000  of  chil- 
dren under  five  years  of  age.  It  is  represented  to  me  on  the  re- 
sponsibility of  Dr.  Tatham,  Dr.  Niven,  and  Dr.  Sykes,  and  other 
well-known  medical  men,  that  where  all  causes  are  responsible  for 
27  per  1000  of  deaths,  it  is  38,  and  not  27,  in  back-to-back  houses  ; 
infectious  diseases  were  4.5  in  through-ventilated  houses  and  8.7 
in  back-to-back  houses;  consumption  stood  at  2.8  in  through-ven- 
tilated houses  and  5.2  in  back-to-back  houses.  In  the  ordinary 
houses  occupied  by  the  labouring  classes  in  regard  to  lung  com- 
plaints the  percentage  was  6.6  in  through-ventilated  houses  and 
g.2  in  back-to-back  houses.  Where  the  children  die  from  diarrhoea 
it  is  1.4  in  through-ventilated  houses  and  3.4  in  back-to-back  houses. 
In  a  town  that  has  recently  expressed  its  desire  to  be  allowed  to 
continue  these  back-to-back  houses,  I  find  this  very  suggestive  com- 
ment made  by  one  of  the  best  authorities  on  housing  (Mr.  Dewsnup) 
in  one  of  the  best  books  on  the  subject  recently  written.  He  says, 
speaking  of  Leeds  back-to-back  houses :  "  Newly  built  the  houses 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  277 

may  look  attractive,  but  what  will  be  their  condition  after  years  of 
wear  and  tear  ?  More  than  a  probability  that  the  conclusion  of 
Manchester  will  be  rejustified." 

England  is  not  so  destitute  of  land  upon  which  to  house  its  poor 
that  they  should  be  housed  in  working-class  tenements  without 
a  back  yard  in  which  to  chop  the  wood  and  put  the  coal,  and  in 
which  the  children  can  play  whilst  the  mother  is  able  to  keep  a 
friendly  eye  on  them  through  the  washhouse  window,  and  at  the 
same  time  continue  to  carry  on  her  domestic  duties.  All  this  is 
impossible  in  back-to-back  houses,  where  the  children  have  only 
a  stuffy  room  for  a  playground ;  and  in  the  days  of  rapid  traction 
you  have  no  right  to  relegate  children  to  play  in  a  small  front  gar- 
den, or  in  the  road  or  street,  when  the  community  is  rich  enough 
to  provide  the  humblest  garden,  in  the  majority  of  cases,  and  some 
measure  of  a  back  yard  in  which  the  youngsters  can  play  whilst  the 
domestic  duties  in  the  house  are  being  carried  out.  This  can  be 
done  better  in  through-ventilated  houses  with  a  back  yard  and  a 
garden  than  is  possible  in  the  case  of  back-to-back  houses. 

We  shall  probably  be  told  that  there  are  one  or  two  details  with 
regard  to  town  planning  that  are  more  arbitrary  than  they  should 
be,  that  they  will  want  amending,  and  that  there  are  other  details 
we  shall  have  to  consider.  On  all  these  points  I  am  quite  con- 
vinced we  shall  be  able  to  meet  hon.  Members  when  this  Bill 
reaches  the  proper  stage.  We  are  extremely  anxious  that  this  Bill 
should  go  through  the  second  reading  before  the  Easter  holidays, 
and  I  have  contented  myself  on  this  occasion  with  giving  a  brief 
outline  of  the  salient  features  of  this  Bill,  which  has  been  before 
the  House  so  long,  and  which  has  been  so  favourably  received 
by  the  country  generally.   .   .   . 

Before  this  session  is  out  I  hope  hon.  Members  in  all  parts  of 
the  House  will  be  gratified  with  having  contributed  in  the  pro- 
duction of  a  useful,  if  a  humble,  measure  affecting  the  life  of  the 
people,  the  effect  of  which  they  will  be  able  to  gauge  better  thirty 
or  forty  years  hence  than  at  the  present  moment.  .  .  , 


2/8  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  ^g 

DETAILED    EXPLANATION    OF    THE    HOUSING    AND   TOWN 
LLANNING    BILL 

[Earl  BeaucJiajiip^  Lords,  September  14,  iQog) 

Earl  Beauchamp  ^ :  Your  Lordships  will  see  that  this  Bill  is 
divided  practically  into  three  parts.  The  fourth  part  we  may  dis- 
miss as  being  supplementary,  and,  if  your  Lordships  will  allow 
me,  I  will  take  Parts  II  and  III  first  because  they  are  not  likely 
to  give  rise  to  so  much  controversy  as  Part  I. 

The  first  clause  of  Part  III  —  namely.  Clause  68  —  enjoins  the 
appointment  of  a  medical  officer  of  health  by  each  county  council. 
In  subsection  (5)  your  Lordships  will  see  the  very  important  pro- 
vision which  affects  their  appointment.  They  are  to  be  removable 
by  the  county  council  with  the  consent  of  the  Local  Government 
Board  and  not  otherwise,  and  they  are  not  to  be  appointed  for  a 
limited  period.  Those  of  your  Lordships  who  have  practical  ex- 
perience of  the  administration  of  the  various  sanitary  provisions  in 
different  Acts  of  Parliament  must  know  the  difficulty  which  fre- 
quently arises  when  medical  officers  of  health  or  sanitary  inspectors 
are  expected  to  deal  with  property  belonging  to  the  members  of 
the  body  which  appoints  them.  It  is,  I  am  sure,  within  the  knowl- 
edge of  everybody  who  has  had  anything  to  do  with  local  govern- 
ment under  those  circumstances  that  it  is  almost  unfair  to  expect 
a  medical  officer  of  health  or  a  sanitary  inspector  to  report  very 
adversely  upon  property,  however  bad  it  may  be,  if  it  is  possible 
within  the  next  twelve  months  that  this  adverse  report  will  be 
succeeded  by  his  dismissal  from  office.  It  is  an  unfair  position  in 
which  to  put  a  medical  officer  of  health,  and  this  demand  that  he 
should  be  irremovable  is  one  that  has  been  made  for  a  long  time 
by  a  very  large  number  of  people.    The  next  important  clause  is 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  2,  col.  1141  sqq. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  279 

Clause  7 1 ,  by  which  every  county  council  is  obliged  to  establish 
a  public  health  and  housing  committee  to  which  the  council  may 
delegate  any  of  their  powers  as  respects  public  h(?alth  and  housing 
as  they  think  fit,  with  the  exception  of  raising  a  rate  or  borrowing 
money.  Your  Lordships  will  see  that  that  will  secure  throughout 
the  country  the  appointment  of  committees  charged  with  the  specific 
duty  of  looking  after  public  health,  and  will  also  secure  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  medical  officer  particularly  well  qualified  to  assist  the 
committee  in  their  work. 

Then,  may  I  call  your  attention  to  Part  II  of  the  Bill,  which 
deals  with  town  planning.  Now  the  idea  of  town  planning,  or  of 
dealing  with  it  by  Statute,  is,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  a  comparatively 
new  one  in  this  country,  although  there  have  been  provisions  of  a 
somewhat  similar  kind  very  much  used  in  other  countries  and  with 
very  good  effect.  Your  Lordships  will  see  that  Clause  54  says, 
"  A  town  planning  scheme  may  be  made  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  this  Part  of  the  Act  as  respects  any  land  which  is  in 
course  of  development  or  appears  likely  to  be  used  for  building 
purposes."  The  object  of  a  scheme  for  town  planning  is  to  secure 
"  proper  sanitary  conditions,  amenity,  and  convenience  in  connexion 
with  the  laying  out  and  use  of  the  land,  and  of  any  neighbouring 
lands." 

Your  Lordships  will  see  that  subsection  (4)  gives  the  Local  Gov- 
ernment Board  power  to  approve  of  a  town  planning  scheme,  and 
without  their  approval  no  such  scheme  will  become  effective.  It 
is  suggested  that  these  are  very  extensive  powers  to  give  to  the 
Local  Government  Board.  Well,  my  Lords,  it  is  difficult  to  say  in 
what  other  way  you  could  deal  with  this  particular  point.  I  think 
most  people  who  are  concerned  with  local  government  are  anxious 
to  avoid  expense  as  far  as  possible,  and  the  insertion  of  a  Provi- 
sional Order  here  would  not  only  add  greatly  to  the  expense  but  also 
considerably  delay  the  putting  into  force  of  any  of  these  schemes.^ 

1  An  amendment  was  subsequently  added,  embodying  such  Provisional  Orders. 
Cf.  infra,  p.  303. 


28o  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

I  should  like  further  to  call  attention  to  the  proviso  in  Clause  55, 
by  which  if  the  scheme  contains  provisions  suspending  any  enact- 
ment contained  in  a  public  general  Act,  the  scheme  shall  not  come 
into  force  unless  a  draft  has  been  laid  before  each  House  of  Par- 
liament for  a  period  of  not  less  than  forty  days,  so  that  under 
this  proviso  there  is  a  considerable  check  put  upon  the  Local 
Government  Board,  which  will  not  be  able  to  override  any  public 
enactment. 

If  your  Lordships  will  turn  to  Clause  56  you  will  see  that  the 
Local  Government  Board  are  anxious  to  secure  as  far  as  possible 
the  co-operation  of  the  local  authority  and  the  landowners  and  other 
persons  interested  in  the  land  in  preparing  these  schemes. 

Clause  57  gives  the  Local  Government  Board  power  to  enforce 
a  scheme,  and  I  should  perhaps  remind  your  Lordships  that  the 
idea  is  not  that  the  Board  should  do  the  work  unless  they  are 
obliged  to  do  it,  but  that  their  position  should  rather  be  one  of 
supervision  and  of  assistance. 

Clause  58  deals  with  compensation,  and  here  your  Lordships 
will  see  that,  under  subsection  (3),  where  the  property  is  increased 
in  value  by  the  operation  of  any  town  planning  scheme  under  cer- 
tain circumstances,  the  local  authority  may  recover  from  any  person 
whose  property  is  so  increased  the  amount  of  that  increase.  Con- 
versely, if  the  property  is  injured  by  one  of  these  town  planning 
schemes,  then  by  subsection  (4)  the  person  will  be  entitled  to  re- 
cover the  amount  of  the  injury  which  he  suffers.  Clause  61  deals 
with  compulsion,  but  I  do  not  think  that  that  is  a  clause  to  which 
any  of  your  Lordships  are  likely  to  suggest  an  amendment. 

Now  we  come  to  Part  I  of  the  Bill,  the  most  important  part, 
dealing  with  housing.  I  suppose  it  is  difficult  to  exaggerate  the 
importance  attached  by  a  great  many  people  to  this  Bill.  In  the 
eyes  of  a  great  many  people  housing  reform  is  one  of  the  most 
important  parts  of  social  reform,  and,  indeed,  some  think  that  it 
lies  at  the  very  foundation  of  that  reform.  Nobody  denies  that  the 
problem  exists,  and  this  Bill  deals  with  two  different  departments 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  28 1 

of  the  same  subject.  First  of  all  there  is  the  question  of  new 
houses,  and  there  is  also  the  question  of  insanitary  houses  and  the 
putting  of  such  houses  into  proper  condition.  I  think  we  all  admit 
the  difficulty  there  is  in  rural  districts  of  building  new  cottages 
on  an  economic  basis,  and  that  is  why  one  of  the  clauses  in  the 
Bill  provides  that  the  terms  on  which  the  loan  is  to  be  made  to 
a  local  authority  shall  be  exceptionally  favourable.  But  the  main 
clause  of  this  Part  of  the  Bill  is  the  first,  in  which  Part  III  of  the 
Housing  of  the  Working  Classes  Act  of  i8go  is  adopted  through- 
out the  whole  of  the  country.  Up  till  now  Part  III  of  that  Act 
has  merely  been  optional,  and  a  rural  district  council  can  only 
adopt  it  with  the  consent  of  the  county  council,  which  has  to  have 
regard  to  various  considerations  before  giving  consent.  In  point 
of  fact  it  has  been  found  that  that  part  of  the  Act  has  been  made 
very  little  use  of  indeed.  It  has  only  been  adopted  by  nine  or  ten 
rural  district  councils.  Part  III  of  the  Act  of  1890  become^  oper- 
ative at  once  throughout  the  whole  country. 

The  clause  to  which  I  am  afraid  there  may  be  some  objection 
in  this  House  is  Clause  2,  which  must  be  read  together  with  the 
First  Schedule.  It  is  the  clause  which  deals  with  the  acquisition 
of  land.  Now  I  may  say  at  once  that  in  this  matter  the  Local 
Government  Board  has  followed  the  precedent  of  the  Small  Hold- 
ings and  Allotments  Act.  That  is  a  precedent  to  which  your 
Lordships  have  already  given  your  approval,  and  we  hope  that 
you  will  give  your  assent  to  the  adoption  of  a  similar  procedure 
in  this  case.  The  object  which  His  Majesty's  Government  have 
in  this  matter  is  really  two-fold.  In  the  first  place  we  want  to 
simplify  procedure,  and,  in  the  second  place,  to  reduce  expendi- 
ture ;  and  we  believe  that  this  method  —  which  I  think  experience 
has  shown,  in  connection  with  the  Small  Holdings  Act,  has  not 
worked  badly  —  is  one  which  must  really  be  expected  to  be  of 
considerable  value  in  regard  to  this  Bill.  The  necessity  of  simpli- 
fying the  machinery  is  proved  by  a  passage  in  the  Report  of  the 
Select  Committee,  in  which  they  say : 


282  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

At  present  one  of  the  chief  obstacles  in  the  way  of  local  authorities 
who  desire  to  put  the  Housing  Acts  in  operation  is  the  conflicting  nature 
of  the  machinery  by  which  land  can  be  compulsorily  acquired.  Not  only 
does  this  tend  to  make  a  local  authority  reluctant  to  take  any  action  at 
all,  but  in  cases  where  action  has  been  decided  upon  it  almost  neces- 
sarily increases  the  expense  of  their  scheme,  since  local  authorities  will 
often  be  prepared  to  pay  more  than  the  market  value  of  the  land  required 
rather  than  undergo  the  delay  which  the  resort  to  compulsory  powers  now 
involves. 

This  particular  clause,  when  read  with  the  First  Schedule,  simply 
follows  the  provisions  of  the  Small  Holdings  and  Allotments  Act. 

After  Clause  3,  to  which  I  have  already  referred,  —  a  clause 
which  deals  with  the  making  of  loans  by  the  Public  Works  Loan 
Commissioners  and  the  terms  on  which  the  loans  are  to  be  ob- 
tained, —  there  are  a  number  of  clauses  relating  to  small  matters, 
such  as  the  expenditure  of  money  for  housing  purposes  in  the  case 
of  settled  land,  allowing  a  local  authority  to  accept  a  donation  of 
land,  and  so  forth.  In  Clause  i  o  we  come  to  the  clause  which  gives 
powers  for  enforcing  the  Housing  Acts,  and  your  Lordships  will 
see  that  here  the  Local  Government  Board  step  in.  Li  Clause  10 
the  Local  Government  Board  are  empowered,  if  on  due  com- 
plaint, amongst  others,  from  four  inhabitants  they  find  that  a  local 
authority  have  failed  to  exercise  their  powers,  to  declare  them  in 
default,  and  to  limit  the  time  for  carrying  out  the  works  required, 
and  in  some  cases  to  direct  the  county  council  to  execute  them. 
Clause  1 1  provides  that  if  a  local  authority  fail  to  perform  their 
duty  in  carrying  out  an  improvement  scheme  under  Part  I  of 
the  Act  of  1890,  or  in  giving  effect  to  an  Order  as  regards  an 
obstructive  building,  the  Board  may  make  an  order  requiring  the 
local  authority  to  remedy  the  default  and  to  do  what  is  requisite. 
Power  is  of  course  necessarily  given  to  the  Board  to  enforce  their 
orders  by  mandamus. 

Then  your  Lordships  will  see  that  in  Clauses  12  and  13  pro- 
vision is  made  whereby,  under  certain  circumstances,  a  county 
council  may  step  in  if,  in  their  opinion,  a  rural  district  council 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  283 

have  failed  to  exercise  their  powers.  Clause  14  is  a  clause  which 
increases  the  implied  condition.  Your  Lordships  know  that  in  the 
case  of  houses  which  are  of  small  value  there  is  an  implied  con- 
dition on  the  landlord  to  see  that  they  are  kept  in  a  proper  state 
of  sanitary  repair  and  are  fit  for  human  habitation.  This  clause 
increases  the  number  of  houses  to  which  that  implied  condition 
will  in  future  apply.  May  I  say  in  passing  that  this  clause  does 
no  more  than  carry  out  what  I  might  almost  call  a  favourite  prin- 
ciple of  the  Liberal  party.  We  all  know  of  good  landlords  who 
keep  their  houses  in  a  state  of  sanitary  repair,  and  one  of  the 
objects  of  this  Bill  is  to  impose  upon  bad  landlords  the  obligation 
which  good  landlords  cheerfully  and  readily  admit  and  already 
undertake. 

It  is  just  the  same  principle  as  that  which  operated  in  the  case 
of  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act.  We  know  that  all  over  the  country 
there  were  a  large  number  of  good  landlords  who  already  gave 
old  age  pensions.  Now,  under  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  every- 
body is  given  an  old  age  pension  who  is  entitled  to  one,  whatever 
may  be  the  character  of  his  employer.  So  it  is  also  with  the  Em- 
ployers' Liability  Acts.  A  large  number  of  employers  throughout 
the  country  did,  without  doubt,  compensate  their  workmen  prob- 
ably even  more  liberally  than  any  employer  is  bound  to  do  now 
under  the  Acts,  and  the  object  of  the  Acts  was  simply  to  force 
the  bad  employer  to  do  that  which  the  good  employer  was  doing 
already.  Here  in  this  clause  we  have  the  obligation  put  upon  the 
bad  landlord  to  keep  his  houses  in  that  state  of  sanitary  r-epair  in 
which  a  good  landlord  is  always  pleased  to  see  his  own  property 
maintained. 

Clause  17  deals  with  the  duty  of  the  local  authority  as  regards 
the  closing  of  houses  which  are  unfit  for  human  habitation,  and 
here  it  would,  perhaps,  be  most  convenient  to  deal  first  of  all  with 
the  law  as  it  stands  at  present  under  the  Act  of  1890.  At  the 
present  time  it  is  the  duty  of  the  local  authority  to  inspect  these 
houses,  but  the  obligation  does  not  go   beyond  mere  inspection. 


284  BRITISH    SOCIAL   POLITICS 

Then,  if  it  is  considered  necessary  to  close  these  houses,  they  are 
closed  by  the  local  authority  upon  an  order  made  by  the  magis- 
trates. The  alteration  proposed  by  this  Bill  is  that  the  inspection 
should  in  future  be  made  in  the  same  way  as  before,  but  that  the 
local  authority  should  also  keep  such  records  as  may  be  prescribed 
by  the  Board.  That  will  mean  that  probably  the  inspection  will  be 
done  more  carefully  than  it  has  been  in  the  past.  The  second  point 
is  that  the  local  authority  will  be  able  to  make  the  order  without 
referring  to  the  justices  for  the  power  to  close,  as  they  have  to  do 
at  the  present  time  before  they  can  act.  It  is  obvious,  I  am  sure, 
that  this  must  result  in  a  great  simplification  of  the  system  of 
making  closing  orders,  and  that  it  will  render  it  easier  for  the  local 
authorities  to  shut  up  insanitary  houses,  while  it  will  also  increase  the 
amount  of  inspection.  This  very  important  clause  —  Clause  1 7  — 
which  deals  with  existing  insanitary  houses  also  prohibits  under- 
ground sleeping  rooms.   .   .   . 

Clause  18  allows  an  order  for  the  demolition  of  a  house  to  be 
postponed  if  the  owner  undertakes  to  carry  out  the  work  neces- 
sary to  render  it  fit  for  human  habitation.  Then  come  a  number 
of  comparatively  unimportant  clauses  such  as  those  which  deal  with 
the  vesting  of  water  pipes  and  the  modification  of  schemes. 

The  next  important  clause,  which  is  likely,  I  am  afraid,  to  meet 
with  some  opposition  in  your  Lordships'  House,  is  one  which  deals 
with  back-to-back  houses.  That  is  Clause  44.^  Your  Lordships 
will  see  that  this  Bill  deals  with  Scotland,  but  not  with  Ireland, 
the  latter  country  having  been  dealt  with  last  year  under  a  special 
Bill.  It  is,  however,  the  intention  of  the  Local  Government  Board, 
if  your  Lordships  pass  this  Bill,  to  introduce  next  year  a  General 
Consolidation  Bill  dealing  with  the  whole  subject,  which  will,  I 
think,  be  a  matter  of  considerable  convenience  to  all  who  are  con- 
cerned in  the  work  of  local  administration.  I  think  your  Lordships 
will  agree  that  if  the  Local  Government  Board  were  to  use  the 
powers  given  them  under  this  Bill  too  drastically,  there  would  be 
1  Clause  4  ^  in  the  measure  as  finally  enacted. 


THE  HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  285 

so  great  a  danger  of  reaction  that  it  would  be  impossible  for  the 
Board  to  proceed  so  far  as  they  would  wish  in  this  direction.  I 
hope,  therefore,  your  Lordships  will  think  that  you  may  fairly  trust 
the  Local  Government  Board  not  to  go  too  far,  .or  to  use  the 
powers  conferred  upon  them  unfairly,  but  to  do  your  best  to  make 
this  Bill,  if  you  agree  to  its  passage  through  this  House,  a  real 
success.    I  beg  leave  to  move  that  the  Bill  be  read  a  second  time. 


Extract  50 

DANGERS  OF  BUREAUCRACY 
(Earl  of  Onslow^  Lords,  September  14,  iQog) 

The  Earl  of  Onslow  ^ :  There  is  a  peculiarity  of  the  Bill  which 
runs  through  it  from  one  end  to  the  other  to  which  I  feel  bound 
to  draw  attention.  That  is  the  proposal  to  put  in  the  hands  of  a 
Government  Department  a  number  of  duties  which  hitherto  have 
always  been  left  either  to  the  local  authority  or  to  Parliament.  This 
is  a  practice  which  I  am  afraid  under  His  Majesty's  Government 
has  been  slowly  and  steadily  growing.  It  is  not  a  practice  which  I 
for  one  can  look  upon  with  satisfaction.   .   .   . 

I  know  that  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  who  presides  over  the 
Local  Government  Board  is  a  man  of  great  strength  of  character. 
He  is  a  man  with  great  confidence  in  himself,  and  I  am  bound  to 
say  he  inspires  that  confidence  in  other  people.  I  have  had  the 
honour  of  the  acquaintance  of  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  for  a  good 
many  years,  first  upon  the  London  County  Council  and  afterwards 
in  Parliament,  and  I  have  always  thought  he  has  been  actuated  by 
the  highest  motives  and  the  greatest  desire  to  discharge  the  duties 
of  his  office  with  perfect  fairness  and  perfect  justness  to  everybody 
concerned.  But,  my  Lords,  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  will  not 
always  be  at  the  Local  Government  Board.    We  hear  talk  of  an 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  2,  col.  11 50  sqq. 


286  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

impending  General  Election,  and  perhaps  the  right  hon.  Gentleman 
may  find  that  his  attention  will  have  to  be  more  closely  confined 
to  Battersea  than  it  has  been  hitherto,  or  he  might  be  moved  to  a 
higher  Department  of  State,  and  if  he  is  caught  up,  upon  whom 
is  the  mantle  of  Elijah  to  fall  ?  Whatever  good  opinion  I  may  have 
of  the  present  President  of  the  Local  Government  Board,  I  for 
one  should  shrink  from  entrusting  these  powers  to  any  and  every 
possible  successor  of  his  in  that  important  office. 

We  are  told  that  in  this  repect  we  ought  to  take  example  by 
what  is  done  on  the  Continent.  We  are  told  that  in  Germany, 
Austria,  and  Holland  the  local  authorities  are  all  required  to  make 
town  planning  schemes.  Most  of  you  who  have  travelled  on  the 
Continent  would  be  somewhat  loath  to  see  a  town  laid  out  even 
like  Vienna  or  Berlin,  with  their  rings  and  their  rectangular  streets. 
I  think  travellers  visiting  some  of  those  cities  may  look  back  with 
affection  to  the  times  when  we  threaded  the  tortuous  labyrinths  of 
Threadneedle  Street.  Whether  that  be  so  or  not,  at  any  rate  we 
in  this  country  are  not  accustomed  to  be,  and  do  not  wish  to  be, 
governed  by  a  bureaucracy.  Our  principles  are  totally  different 
from  those  which  govern  foreign  nations.  We  have  our  local 
authorities  and  our  supreme  Parliament.  I  am  told  there  are  no 
fewer  than  26,000  local  authorities  in  this  country,  and  I  am 
always  filled  with  amazement  and  satisfaction  when  I  reflect  upon 
the  enormous  amount  of  unpaid  labour  which  citizens  of  this 
country  are  willingly  giving  in  order  to  look  after  the  affairs  of 
their  neighbours.  I  know  it  is  sometimes  said  of  this  House  that 
noble  Lords  might  be  more  regular  in  their  attendance,  and  indeed 
I  think  I  have  heard  the  expression  "  Wild  Peers  from  the  Woods." 
I  do  not  quite  know  what  it  means,  but  I  take  it  that  it  refers  to 
those  Peers  who  attend  our  debates  comparatively  seldom.  Why 
is  that  ?  Is  it  not  because  those  noble  Lords  are  engaged  in  the 
administration  of  affairs  in  their  own  localities  ?  I  venture  to  think 
that  anything  which  tends  to  diminish  local  patriotism  will  be  a 
very  grievous  blow  to  local  institutions  generally. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  287 

Extract  ^i 

FRIENDLY  ECCLESIASTICAL  ATTITUDE  TOWARD 
TOWN  PLANNING 

{Bishop  0/  Bir/nhig/uDn,  Lords,  September  /^,  igog) 

The  Lord  Bishop  of  Birmingham  ^ :  My  Lords,  I  will  ask  you 
to  listen  to  me  for  a  few  moments  on  this  Bill,  but  what  I  have  to 
say  is  entirely  with  reference  to  what  concerns  Our  great  cities,  and 
not  to  what  concerns  the  rural  districts.  I  suppose  there  could  be 
no  assembly  in  which  there  are  so  many  people  qualified  to  speak 
on  the  details  of  rural  affairs,  so  many  people  versed  in  the  man- 
agement of  rural  affairs,  but  I  suppose  there  are  not  quite  so  many 
who  have  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  concerns  of  our  great  and 
still  rapidly  growing  cities.  We  are  all  of  us  proud  of  our  own  city, 
and  certainly  I  am  very  proud  of  the  city  in  which  I  live.  It  is  one 
of  the  very  many  which  have  grown  up  out  of  a  number  of  villages 
in  which  factories  were  established,  which  grew  together  and  have 
"grown  and  become  a  vast  city,  altogether  without  what  one  might 
call  any  guiding  mind  or  plan  or  scheme. 

The  noble  Earl  who  has  just  sat  down  confessed  that  he  became 
very  easily  wearied  with  the  monotony  and  regularity  of  a  city  laid 
out  like  Vienna,  and  that  a  little  experience  of  a  German-planned 
city  made  him  long  for  the  tortuosity  with  which  we  are  familiar 
in  London.  I  venture  to  think  that  if  any  one  of  your  Lordships 
were  to  set  about  the  task  of  learning  your  way  about  Birmingham, 
you  would  indeed  feel  that  tortuosity  and  complication  and  absence 
of  plan  had  been  allowed  to  run  to  excess.  I  do  not  think  it  would 
be  possible  for  anyone  to  make  a  survey  of  many  of  our  great 
cities,  even  of  that  in  which  I  live,  without  feeling  that  the  condi- 
tion of  things  was  in  the  highest  degree  disastrous  to  social  and 
public  welfare.    You  may  pass  vast  areas  in  which  there  is  no  open 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.2,  col.  1157  sqq. 


288  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

space  —  for  your  Lordships  must  know  that  London  stands  in  re- 
spect to  open  spaces,  as  compared  to  a  great  many  of  our  pro- 
vincial towns,  in  a  position  of  quite  infinite  superiority  —  and  this 
is  due,  no  doubt,  to  the  fact  that  the  city  grew  up  totally  without 
planning.  There  can  be  no  one  acquainted  at  all  with  the  sanitary 
condition  of  the  poorer  parts  of  our  cities  who  does  not  know  that 
reform  on  a  very  large  scale,  and  of  a  very  drastic  character,  is 
necessary.  I  venture  to  say  also  that  no  one  can  be  acquainted 
with  the  conditions  in  which  the  suburbs  are  still  being  allowed  to 
grow,  and  the  extraordinary  rapidity  with  which  the  new  suburbs 
of  our  cities  degenerate  into  slums,  without  knowing  that  a  very 
careful,  and,  indeed,  a  deep-rooted  and  far-reaching  plan  and  method 
of  town  planning  is  quite  essential. 

This  Bill  is  designed,  I  presume,  to  meet  those  two  particular 
evils ;  it  is  designed  to  meet  the  evils  inherent  in  our  slum  dwell- 
ings, the  small  houses  in  the  poorer  parts  of  our  cities,  and  also 
to  limit,  as  far  as  can  be  limited,  the  evils  due  to  the  total  absence 
of  plans  with  which  our  cities  are  still  being  allowed  to  grow  up. 
I  was  heartily  glad  to  hear  the  noble  Earl  who  has  just  sat  down 
say  what  he  did  as  to  giving  a  general  welcome  to  this  Bill,  though 
I  do  not  exactly  feel  sure  how  much  of  amendment  he  intends  to 
propose.  At  any  rate,  for  my  own  part  I  heartily  welcome  the  Bill 
as  being  on  the  whole  a  thoroughly  beneficial  measure  entirely  in 
the  right  direction.  The  noble  Earl  said  what  indeed  is  true,  that 
it  has  not  been  our  manner  to  encourage  centralised  government 
and  bureaucracy.  Is  it  not  the  case  that  anyone  acquainted  with 
our  English  life  must  realise  that  there  is  a  very  large  opportunity 
for  us  to  limit  the  go-as-you-please  policy  which  Englishmen 
delight  in  without  by  any  means  speedily  or  easily  arriving  at 
the  point  of  completely  centralised  bureaucracy.  I  do  not  think 
it  would  be  possible  for  anyone  who  knows  the  history  of  the 
efforts  made  in  the  last  thirty  years  to  remove  the  appalling  evils 
with  regard  to  housing,  who  knows  the  difficulties  which  those 
efforts  have  met  with,  or  has  realised  how  often  those  efforts 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  289 

have  been  unsuccessful,  to  fail  to  see  that  we  do  need  a  great 
deal  more  of  what  we  call  central  control. 

I  was  glad  to  hear  the  noble  Earl  who  introduced  the  Bill  speak 
of  the  clause  about  the  appointment  of  medical  officers  of  health. 
What  the  noble  Earl  said  upon  this  subject  touches  a  point  which 
must  be  familiar  to  anyone  acquainted  with  local  politics  —  namely, 
the  extreme  need  of  giving  a  far  greater  measure  of  independence 
to  the  medical  officer  of  health.  I  heartily  welcome  that  particular 
clause.  But  there  is  one  other  clause  with  regard  to  which  I  should 
like  to  say  a  word.  Those  who  in  my  neighbourhood  are  specially 
interested  in  this  matter  are  profoundly  impressed  by  the  fact  that 
we  must  rely  to  a  great  extent,  not  only  on  municipal  efforts,  but 
also  on  the  efforts  of  public-spirited  individuals  and  voluntary  so- 
cieties for  the  promotion  of  public  utility.  Therefore  they  are 
very  urgent  about  Clause  61,  subsection  (Ji),  which,  I  believe,  was 
threatened  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  survived  with  difficulty, 
and  which  would  give  the  Local  Government  Board  the  power  of 
interference.  The  clause  provides  that  if  the  Local  Government 
Board  are  satisfied  on  any  representation,  after  holding  a  local  in- 
quiry, that  a  local  authority  have  failed  to  adopt  a  scheme  proposed 
by  owners  of  any  land  in  a  case  where  the  scheme  ought  to  be 
adopted,  the  Board  may  order  the  local  authority  to  prepare  and 
submit  for  the  approval  of  the  Board  such  a  town  planning  scheme 
and  to  adopt  the  scheme,  or  to  consent  to  the  modifications  or  con- 
ditions so  imposed.  The  persons  to  whom  I  refer  earnestly  hope 
that  His  Majesty's  Government  will  adhere  to  that  clause,  which 
gives  the  Local  Government  Board  power  to  intervene  where  it 
appears  that  local  public  bodies  have  not  been  sufficiently  willing 
to  assist  and  co-operate  with  public-spirited  individuals. 

My  Lords,  there  is  one  clause  which  was  in  the  Bill,  but  which 
is  not  in  the  Bill  as  it  now  appears,  the  absence  of  which  some  of 
us  deeply  deplore.  I  would  earnestly  ask  this  House  whether  it  is 
not  possible  to  restore,  even  at  this  stage.  Clause  30.^    Clause  30, 

1  The  clause  indicated  was  not  restored. 


290  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

as  it  was,  instituted  a  quinquennial  survey  and  register.  It  made 
it  the  duty  of  every  local  authority  to  cause  to  be  made  in  every 
parish  an  inspection  survey  as  regards  certain  property ;  and  the 
things  which  had  to  be  registered  included  the  addresses  of  the 
rated  occupier  and  the  beneficial  owner.  Those  of  us  who  have 
been  interested  in  this  matter  for  some  time  have  cause  to  attach 
extraordinary  importance  to  such  a  register.  In  part  there  is  already 
an  obligation  upon  the  local  authority  to  make  a  survey  of  the  prop- 
erty within  their  region,  but  inquiries  made  by  the  National  Hous- 
ing Reform  Council  led  to  the  recognition  that  this  duty  was  being 
very  widely  neglected.  It  appears  there  were  only  sixteen,  I  think, 
out  of  1 1 2  urban  and  rural  district  councils  which  effectively  carried 
out  the  requirements  of  the  law.  Now  I  observe  that  in  Clause  1 1 
as  it  stands  in  the  Bill  there  is  power  given  to  the  Local  Govern- 
ment Board  to  intervene  to  cause  the  local  authority  to  be  more  effi- 
cient in  the  fulfilment  of  what  is  already  their  statutory  obligation, 
but  that  falls  very  far  short  of  the  proposal  in  Clause  30  as  it  did 
stand  in  the  Bill.  An  important  deputation  —  introduced,  I  believe, 
by  the  most  rev.  Primate  —  laid  great  stress  upon  the  importance 
of  this  survey  and  register,  and  I  think  I  am  right  in  saying  that 
the  late  Prime  Minister  specially  recognised  the  importance  of  that 
point.  I  should  very  much  like  to  know  from  His  Majesty's  Gov- 
ernment why  it  was  that  that  clause  was  dropped  out  of  the  Bill. 
In  part  it  may  be  on  the  plea  of  expense.  It  is  not  for  me  to  esti- 
mate what  the  expense  would  be ;  but  I  venture  to  say  that  even 
considerable  expense  would  be  thoroughly  justified  in  order  that 
we  might  have  this  register  and  know  who  owns,  with  the  different 
degrees  of  ownership,  the  worst  kinds  of  property  to  be  encountered 
in  parts  of  our  cities. 

It  was  once  my  lot  in  London  to  have  something  to  do  with  a 
society  for  the  buying  up  of  slum  propert}^  in  order  to  get  it  into 
better  hands,  and  my  experience  of  the  extraordinary  difficulty  of 
ascertaining  the  name  of  the  owner  rooted  in  my  mind  the  neces- 
sity of  all  information  with  regard  to  occupation  ownership  being 


THE   HOUSING  AND   LAND   PROBLEM  291 

accessible.  I  very  much  wondered  whether  the  influences,  which  I 
have  reason  to  believe  are  very  strong  influences,  leading  to  a  de- 
sire to  conceal  the  ownership  of  the  worst  properties,  have  not  had 
something  to  do  with  the  resistance  to  what  was  Clause  30.  There 
is  no  consideration  which  Parliament  ought  to  entertain  which  makes 
it  in  any  way  desirable  or  excusable  that  the  real  ownership  of  the 
worst  properties  should  be  a  matter  difficult  to  ascertain,  and  I  very 
sincerely  ask  His  Majesty's  Government  whether  they  will  afford 
facilities  for  the  restoration  of  Clause  30. 

I  thank  your  Lordships  for  having  listened  to  me,  although  I 
know  there  are  very  large  parts  of  this  Bill  with  regard  to  which 
I  have  no  experience  or  knowledge  to  justify  me  in  speaking ;  but 
I  am  quite  sure  that  no  one  could  be  acquainted  with  the  actual 
conditions  of  our  cities  without  becoming  alive  to  the  fact  that 
trenchant  and  wide  reforms  are  necessarily  and  primarily  required 
for  the  welfare  of  the  poorer  parts  of  the  population  —  reforms  so 
trenchant  and  far-reaching  that,  human  nature  being  what  it  is  and 
the  interests  involved  being  what  they  are,  no  one  can  hope  that 
they  can  be  carried  through  without  having  to  encounter  resistance 
and  overcome  opposition. 


Extract  52 

HOUSING,  TOWN   PLANNING,   ETC.   ACT,   1909 

(p  Edtv.  7,  ch.  44,  in  part) 

An  Act  to  amend  the  Law  relating  to  the  Housing  of  the  Working 
Classes,  to  provide  for  the  making  of  Town  Planning  schemes, 
and  to  make  further  provision  with  respect  to  the  appoint- 
ment and  duties  of  County  Medical  Officers  of  Health,  and 
to  provide  for  the  establishment  of  Public  Health  and  Housing 
Committees  of  County  Councils.        (3rd  December  1909) 


292  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 


Part  I 

Housing  of  the  Working  Classes 

/.  Former  Act 

Part  III  of  the  Housing  of  the  Working  Classes  Act,  1890^ 
(in  this  Part  of  this  Act  referred  to  as  the  principal  Act),  shall, 
after  the  commencement  of  this  Act,  extend  to  and  take  effect  in 
every  urban  or  rural  district,  or  other  place  for  which  it  has  not 
been  adopted,  as  if  it  had  been  so  adopted. 

2.   Acquisition  of  Lands 

(i)  A  local  authority  may  be  authorised  to  purchase  land  com- 
pulsorily  for  the  purposes  of  Part  III  of  the  principal  Act,  by 
means  of  an  order  submitted  to  the  Local  Government  Board  and 
confirmed  by  the  Board  in  accordance  with  the  First  Schedule  to 
this  Act.  .  .  . 

J.  Loans 

Where  a  loan  is  made  by  the  Public  Works  Loan  Commissioners 
to  a  local  authority  for  any  purposes  of  the  Housing  Acts  — 
{a)  The  loan  shall  be  made  at  the  minimum  rate  allowed  for 

the  time  being  for  loans  out  of  the  Local  Loans  Fund ; 

and 
{U)  If  the  Local  Government  Board  make  a  recommendation  to 

that  effect,  the  period  for  which  the  loan  is  made  by  the 

Public  Works  Loan  Commissioners  may  exceed  the  period 

1  53  &  54  Vict.,  ch.  70. 


THE  HOUSING  AND   LAND  PROBLEM  293 

allowed  under  the  principal  Act  or  under  any  other  iVct 
limiting  the  period  for  which  the  loan  may  be  made,  but 
the  period  shall  not  exceed  the  period  recommended  by 
the  Local  Government  Board,  nor  in  any  case  eighty 
years ;  and 
(c)  As  between  loans  for  different  periods,  the  longer  duration 
of  the  loan  shall  not  be  taken  as  a  reason  for  fixing  a 
higher  rate  of  interest. 
[Clauses  4-9  relate  to  small  matters,  such  as  the  expenditure  of 

money  for  housing  purposes  in  the  case  of  settled  land,  allowing  a 

local  authority  to  accept  a  donation  of  land,  etc.] 

10.  Enforcement  of  Housing  Acts 

(i)  Where    a   complaint    is    made    to    the   Local  Government 
Board  — 

{a)  as  respects  any  rural  district  by  the  council  of  the  county  in 

which  the  district  is  situate,  or  by  the  parish  council  or 

parish  meeting  of  any  parish  comprised  in  the  district, 

or  by  any  four  inhabitant  householders  of  the  district ;  or 

(fi)  as  respects  any  county  district,  not  being  a  rural  district,  by 

the  council  of  the  county  in  which  the  district  is  situated, 

or  by  four  inhabitant  householders  of  the  district ;  or 

if)  as  respects  the  area  of  any  other  local  authority  by  four 

inhabitant  householders  of  the  area  ; 

that  the  local  authority  have  failed  to  exercise  their  powers  under 

Part  II  or  Part  III  of  the  principal  Act  in  cases  where  those 

powers  ought  to  have  been  exercised,  the  Board  may  cause  a  public 

local  inquiry  to  be  held,  and  if,   after  holding  such  an  inquiry, 

the  Board  are  satisfied  that  there  has  been  such  a  failure  on  the 

part  of  the  local  authority,  the  Board  may  declare  the  authority  to 

be  in  default,  and  may  make  an  order  directing  that  authority, 

within  a  time  limited  by  the  order,  to  carry  out  such  works  and  do 

such  other  things  as  may  be  mentioned  in  the  order  for  the  purpose 

of  remedying  the  default.  .  .  . 


294  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(5)  An  order  made  by  the  Local  Government  Board  under  this 
section  shall  be  laid  before  both  Houses  of  Parliament  as  soon  as 
may  be  after  it  is  made. 

(6)  Any  order  made  by  the  Local  Government  Board  under 
this  section  may  be  enforced  by  mandamus. 

II.  Eirforcement  within  a  Limited  Time 

(i)  Where  it  appears  to  the  Local  Government  Board  that  a 
local  authority  have  failed  to  perform  their  duty  under  the  Housing 
Acts  of  carrying  out  an  improvement  scheme  under  Part  I  of  the 
principal  Act,  or  have  failed  to  give  effect  to  any  order  as  respects 
an  obstructive  building,  or  to  a  reconstruction  scheme,  under  Part  H 
of  that  Act,  or  have  failed  to  cause  to  be  made  the  inspection  of 
their  district  required  by  this  Act,  the  Board  may  make  an  order 
requiring  the  local  authority  to  remedy  the  default  and  to  carry 
out  any  works  or  do  any  other  things  which  are  necessary  for  the 
purpose  under  the  Housing  Acts  within  a  time  fixed  by  the  order. 

(2)  Any  order  made  by  the  Local  Government  Board  under  this 
section  may  be  enforced  by  mandamus. 

[In  Clauses  12  and  13  provision  is  made  whereby,  under  certain 
circumstances,  a  county  council  may  step  in  if,  in  their  opinion,  a 
rural  district  council  have  failed  to  exercise  their  powers.] 

14.    Contracts  by  Landlord 

In  any  contract  made  after  the  passing  of  this  Act  for  letting 

for  habitation  a  house  or  part  of  a  house  at  a  rent  not  exceeding  — 

(a)  in  the  case  of  a  house  situate  in  the  administrative  county 

of  London,  forty  pounds  ; 
{Jy)  in  the  case  of  a  house  situate  in  a  borough  or  urban  district 

with  a  population  according  to  the  last  census  for  the 

time    being   of   fifty    thousand    or   upwards,   twenty-sbc 

pounds ; 
0  in  the  case  of  a  house  situate  elsewhere,  sixteen  pounds ; 


THE  HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  295 

there  shall  be  implied  a  condition  that  the  house  is  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  holding  in  all  respects  reasonably  fit  for  human 
habitation,  but  the  condition  aforesaid  shall  not  be  implied  when  a 
house  or  part  of  a  house  is  let  for  a  term  of  not  less  than  three 
years  upon  the  terms  that  it  be  put  by  the  lessee  into  a  condition 
reasonably  fit  for  occupation,  and  the  lease  is  not  determinable  at 
the  option  of  either  party  before  the  expiration  of  that  term. 

75.    Obligations  of  La7idlord 

(i)  The  last  foregoing  section  shall,  as  respects  contracts  to 
which  that  section  applies,  take  effect  as  if  the  condition  implied 
by  that  section  included  an  undertaking  that  the  house  shall,  dur- 
ing the  holding,  be  kept  by  the  landlord  in  all  respects  reasonably 
fit  for  human  habitation. 

(2)  The  landlord  or  the  local  authority,  or  any  person  author- 
ised by  him  or  them  in  writing,  may  at  reasonable  times  of  the 
day,  on  giving  twenty-four  hours'  notice  in  writing  to  the  tenant 
or  occupier,  enter  any  house,  premises,  or  building  to  which  this 
section  applies  for  the  purpose  of  viewing  the  state  and  condition 
thereof. 

(3)  If  it  appears  to  the  local  authority  within  the  meaning  of 
Part  II  of  the  principal  Act  that  the  undertaking  implied  by  virtue 
of  this  section  is  not  complied  with  in  the  case  of  any  house  to 
which  it  applies,  the  authority  shall,  if  a  closing  order  is  not  made 
with  respect  to  the  house,  by  written  notice  require  the  landlord, 
within  a  reasonable  time,  not  being  less  than  twenty-one  days, 
specified  in  the  notice,  to  execute  such  works  as  the  authority  shall 
specify  in  the  notice  as  being  necessary  to  make  the  house  in  all 
respects  reasonably  fit  for  human  habitation. 

(4)  Within  twenty-one  days  after  the  receipt  of  such  notice  the 
landlord  may  by  written  notice  to  the  local  authority  declare  his  inten- 
tion of  closing  the  house  for  human  habitation,  and  thereupon  a 
closing  order  shall  be  deemed  to  have  become  operative  in  respect 
of  such  house. 


296  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(5)  If  the  notice  given  by  the  local  authority  is  not  complied 
with,  and  if  the  landlord  has  not  given  the  notice  mentioned  in  the 
immediately  preceding  subsection,  the  authority  may,  at  the  expira- 
tion of  the  time  specified  in  the  notice  given  by  them  to  the  land- 
lord, do  the  work  required  to  be  done  and  recover  the  expenses 
incurred  by  them  in  so  doing  from  the  landlord  as  a  civil  debt  in 
manner  provided  by  the  Summary  Jurisdiction  Acts,  or,  if  they 
think  fit,  the  authority  may  by  order  declare  any  such  expenses  to 
be  payable  by  annual  instalments  within  a  period  not  exceeding 
that  of  the  interest  of  the  landlord  in  the  house,  nor  in  any  case 
•five  years,  with  interest  at  a  rate  not  exceeding  five  pounds  per 
cent,  per  annum,  until  the  whole  amount  is  paid,  and  any  such  in- 
stalments or  interest  or  any  part  thereof  may  be  recovered  from 
the  landlord  as  a  civil  debt  in  manner  provided  by  the  Summary 
Jurisdiction  Acts. 

(6)  A  landlord  may  appeal  to  the  Local  Government  Board 
against  any  notice  requiring  him  to  execute  works  under  this  sec- 
tion, and  against  any  demand  for  the  recovery  of  expenses  from  him 
under  this  section  or  order  made  with  respect  to  those  expenses 
under  this  section  by  the  authority,  by  giving  notice  of  appeal  to 
the  Board  within  twenty-one  days  after  the  notice  is  received,  or 
the  demand  or  order  is  made,  as  the  case  may  be,  and  no  pro- 
ceedings shall  be  taken  in  respect  of  such  notice  requiring  works, 
order,  or  demand,  whilst  the  appeal  is  pending. 

(7)  In  this  section  the  expression  "  landlord  "  means  any  person 
who  lets  to  a  tenant  for  habitation  the  house  under  any  contract 
referred  to  in  this  section,  and  includes  his  successors  in  title ;  and 
the  expression  "  house  "  includes  part  of  a  house.  .  .  . 

[Section  16  amends  Acts  of  1875  ^'""^  189I)  extending  the  power 
of  making  byelaws  with  respect  to  lodging-houses  for  the  working 
classes.] 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  297 

77.    Closing  of  Unjit  Dwellings 

(i)  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  local  authority  within  the 
meaning  of  Part  II  of  the  principal  Act  to  cause  to  be  made 
from  time  to  time  inspection  of  their  district,  with  a  view  to 
ascertain  whether  any  dwelling-house  therein  is  in  a  state  so  dan- 
gerous or  injurious  to  health  as  to  be  unfit  for  human  habitation, 
and  for  that  purpose  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  local  authority, 
and  of  every  officer  of  the  local  authority,  to  comply  with  such 
regulations  and  to  keep  such  records  as  may  be  prescribed  by 
the  Board. 

(2)  If,  on  the  representation  of  the  medical  officer  of  health,  or 
of  any  other  officer  of  the  authority,  or  other  information  given,  any 
dwelling-house  appears  to  them  to  be  in  such  a  state,  it  shall  be 
their  duty  to  make  an  order  prohibiting  the  use  of  the  dwelling- 
house  for  human  habitation  (in  this  Act  referred  to  as  a  closing 
order)  until  in  the  judgment  of  the  local  authority  the  dwelling- 
house  is  rendered  fit  for  that  purpose. 

(3)  Notice  of  a  closing  order  shall  be  forthwith  served  on  every 
owner  of  the  dwelling-house  in  respect  of  which  it  is  made,  and 
any  owner  aggrieved  by  the  order  may  appeal  to  the  Local  Gov- 
ernment Board  by  giving  notice  of  appeal  to  the  Board  within 
fourteen  days  after  the  order  is  served  upon  him. 

(4)  Where  a  closing  order  has  become  operative,  the  local 
authority  shall  serve  notice  of  the  order  on  every  occupying 
tenant  of  the  dwelling-house  in  respect  of  which  the  order  is 
made,  and,  within  such  period  as  is  specified  in  the  notice,  not 
being  less  than  fourteen  days  after  the  service  of  the  notice,  the 
order  shall  be  obeyed  by  him,  and  he  and  his  family  shall  cease 
to  inhabit  the  dwelling-house,  and  in  default  he  shall  be  liable 
on  summary  conviction  to  be  ordered  to  quit  the  dwelling-house 
within  such  time  as  may  be  specified  in  the  order. 

(5)  Unless  the  dwelling-house  has  been  made  unfit  for  habita- 
tion by  the  wilful  act  or  default  of  the  tenant  or  of  any  person 


298  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

for  whom  as  between  himself  and  the  owner  or  landlord  he  is 
responsible,  the  local  authority  may  make  to  every  such  tenant 
such  reasonable  allowance  on  account  of  his  expense  in  removing 
as  may  be  determined  by  the  local  authority  with  the  consent  of 
the  owner  of  the  dwelling-house,  or,  if  the  owner  of  the  dwelling- 
house  fails  to  consent  to  the  sum  determined  by  the  local  author- 
ity, as  may  be  fixed  by  a  court  of  summary  jurisdiction,  and  the 
amount  of  the  said  allowance  shall  be  recoverable  by  the  local 
authority  from  the  owner  of  the  dwelling-house  as  a  civil  debt  in 
manner  provided  by  the  Summary  Jurisdiction  Acts. 

(6)  The  local  authority  shall  determine  any  closing  order  made 
by  them  if  they  are  satisfied  that  the  dwelling-house,  in  respect  of 
which  the  order  has  been  made,  has  been  rendered  fit  for  human 
habitation. 

If,  on  the  application  of  any  owner  of  a  dwelling-house,  the 
local  authority  refuse  to  determine  a  closing  order,  the  owner  may 
appeal  to  the  Local  Government  Board  by  giving  notice  of  appeal 
to  the  Board  within  fourteen  days  after  the  application  is  refused. 

(7)  A  room  habitually  used  as  a  sleeping  place,  the  surface  of 
the  floor  of  which  is  more  than  three  feet  below  the  surface  of  the 
part  of  the  street  adjoining  or  nearest  to  the  room,  shall  for  the 
purposes  of  this  section  be  deemed  to  be  a  dwelling-house  so  dan- 
gerous or  injurious  to  health  as  to  be  unfit  for  human  habitation, 
if  the  room  either  — 

Qr)  is  not  on  an  average  at  least  seven  feet  in  height  from  floor 
to  ceiling ;  or 

(^)  does  not  comply  with  such  regulations  as  the  local  authority 
with  the  consent  of  the  Local  Government  Board  may 
prescribe  for  securing  the  proper  ventilation  and  lighting 
of  such  rooms,  and  the  protection  thereof  against  damp- 
ness, effluvia,  or  exhalation :  Provided  that  if  the  local 
authority,  after  being  required  to  do  so  by  the  Local 
Government  Board,  fail  to  make  such  regulations,  or 
such  regulations  as  the  Board  approve,  the  Board  may 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  299 

themselves   make    them,   and    the    regulations   so  made 

shall  have  effect  as  if  they  had  been  made  by  the  local 

authority  with  the  consent  of  the  l>oard : 

Provided  that  a  closing  order  made  in  respect  of  a  room  to 

which  this  subsection  applies  shall  not  prevent  the  room  being 

used  for  purposes  other  than  those  of  a  sleeping  place ;  and  that,  if 

the  occupier  of  the  room  after  notice  of  an  order  has  been  served 

upon  him  fails  to  comply  with  the  order,  an  order  to   comply 

therewith  may,  on  summary  conviction,  be  made  against  him. 

This  subsection  shall  not  come  into  operation  until  the  first  day 
of  July  nineteen  hundred  and  ten,  and  a  closing  order  made  in 
respect  of  any  room  to  which  this  subsection  applies  shall  not  be 
treated  as  a  closing  order  in  respect  of  a  dwelling-house  for  the 
purposes  of  the  next  succeeding  section. 

18.    Order  for  Demolition 

(i)  Where  a  closing  order  in  respect  of  any  dwelling-house  has 
remained  operative  for  a  period  of  three  months,  the  local  authority 
shall  take  into  consideration  the  question  of  the  demolition  of  the 
dwelling-house,  and  shall  give  every  owner  of  the  dwelling-house 
notice  of  the  time  (being  some  time  not  less  than  one  month  after 
the  service  of  the  notice)  and  place  at  which  the  question  will  be 
considered,  and  any  owner  of  the  dwelling-house  shall  be  entitled 
to  be  heard  when  the  question  is  so  taken  into  consideration. 

(2)  If  upon  any  such  consideration  the  local  authority  are  of 
opinion  that  the  dwelling-house  has  not  been  rendered  fit  for 
human  habitation,  and  that  the  necessary  steps  are  not  being 
taken  with  all  due  diligence  to  render  it  so  fit,  or  that  the  con- 
tinuance of  any  building,  being  or  being  part  of  the  dwelling- 
house,  is  a  nuisance  or  dangerous  or  injurious  to  the  health  of 
the  public  or  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  neighbouring  dwelling- 
houses,   they  shall  order  the  demolition  of  the  building.   .   .   . 

[Clauses  ig-35  embody  a  large  number  of  minor  amendments 
to  former  laws.] 


300  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

j6.  Inspection  of  Ifousitig 

Any  person  authorised  in  writing  stating  the  particular  purpose 
or  purposes  for  which  the  entry  is  authorised,  by  the  local  author- 
ity or  the  Local  Government  Board,  may  at  all  reasonable  times, 
on  giving  twenty-four  hours'  notice  to  the  occupier  and  to  the 
owner,  if  the  owner  is  known,  of  his  intention,  enter  any  house, 
premises,  or  buildings  — 

(a)  for  the  purpose  of  survey  or  valuation,  in  the  case  of  houses, 

premises,  or  buildings  which  the  local  authority  are  author- 
ised to  purchase  compulsorily  under  the  Housing  Acts;  and 

(b)  for  the  purpose  of  survey  and  examination,  in  the  case  of 

any  dwelling-house  in  respect  of  which  a  closing  order  or 
an  order  for  demolition  has  been  made ;  or 
(/)  for  the  purpose  of  survey  and  examination,  where  it  appears 
to  the  authority  or  Board  that  survey  or  examination 
is  necessary  in  order  to  determine  whether  any  powers 
under  the  Housing  Acts  should  be  exercised  in  respect 
of  any  house,  premises,  or  building. 
Notice  may  be  given  to  the  occupier  for  the  purposes  of  this  sec- 
tion by  leaving  a  notice  addressed  to  the  occupier,  without  name 
or  further  description,  at  the  house,  buildings,  or  premises. 

jy.  Report  on  Crowded  Area 

If  it  appears  to  the  Local  Government  Board  that  owing  to 
density  of  population,  or  any  other  reason,  it  is  expedient  to  in- 
quire into  the  circumstances  of  any  area  with  a  view  to  deter- 
mining whether  any  powers  under  the  Housing  Acts  should  be 
put  into  force  in  that  area  or  not,  the  Local  Government  Board 
may  require  the  local  authority  to  make  a  report  to  them  contain- 
ing such  particulars  as  to  the  population  of  the  district  and  other 
matters  as  they  direct,  and  the  local  authority  shall  comply  with 
the  requirement  of  the  Local  Government  Board.   .  .  . 

[Clauses  38-42  are  concerned  with  administrative  details.] 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  301 

4J.  Prohibition  of  Back-to-back  Houses 

Notwithstanding  anything  in  any  local  Act  or  byelaw  in  force 
in  any  borough  or  district,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  to  erect  any  back- 
to-back  houses  intended  to  be  used  as  dwellings  for  the  working 
classes,  and  any  such  house  commenced  to  be  erected  after  the 
passing  of  this  Act  shall  be  deemed  to  be  unfit  for  human  habita- 
tion for  the  purposes  of  the  provisions  of  the  Housing  Acts. 
Provided  that  nothing  in  this  section  — 

(a)  shall  prevent  the  erection  or  use  of  a  house  containing 
several  tenements  in  which  the  tenements  are  placed 
back  to  back,  if  the  medical  officer  of  health  for  the 
district  certifies  that  the  several  tenements  are  so  con- 
structed and  arranged  as  to  secure  effective  ventilation 
of  all  habitable  rooms  in  every  tenement ;  or 
{It)  shall  apply  to  houses  abutting  on  any  streets  the  plans 
whereof   have   been   approved  by  the  local  authority 
before   the   first   day  of   May  nineteen   hundred   and 
nine,  in  any  borough  or  district  in  which,  at  the  pass- 
ing of  this  Act,  any  local  Act  or  byelaws  are  in  force 
permitting  the  erection  of  back-to-back  houses. 
[Clause  44  gives  power  to  the  Local  Government  Board  to 
revoke  unreasonable  byelaws.] 

4S.  Saving  of  Sites  of  Ancient  Monuments^  etc. 

Nothing  in  the  Housing  Acts  shall  authorise  the  acquisition  for 
the  purposes  of  those  Acts  of  any  land  which  is  the  site  of  an 
ancient  monument  or  other  object  of  archaeological  interest,  or 
the  compulsory  acquisition  for  the  purposes  of  Part  HI  of  the 
Housing  of  the  Working  Classes  Act,  1890,  of  any  land  which 
is  the  property  of  any  local  authority  or  has  been  acquired  by 
any  corporation  or  company  for  the  purposes  of  a  railway,  dock, 
canal,  water,  or  other  public  undertaking,  or  which  at  the  date  of 
the  order  forms  part  of  any  park,  garden,  or  pleasure  ground, 


302  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

or  is  otherwise  required  for  the  amenity  or  convenience  of  any 
dwelling-house. 

[Clauses   46-53    comprise   definitions   of    technical    terms   and 
special  provisions  as  to  the  application  of  Part  I   to  Scotland.] 


Part  II 

Town  Planning 

5^.  Preparation  and  Approval  of  Town  Planning  Scheme 

(i)  A  town  planning  scheme  may  be  made  in  accordance  with 
the  provisions  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  as  respects  any  land  which 
is  in  course  of  development  or  appears  likely  to  be  used  for  build- 
ing purposes,  vv'ith  the  general  object  of  securing  proper  sanitary 
conditions,  amenity,  and  convenience  in  connexion  with  the  laying 
out  and  use  of  the  land,  and  of  any  neighbouring  lands. 

(2)  The  Local  Government  Board  may  authorise  a  local  author- 
ity within  the  meaning  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  to  prepare  such  a 
town  planning  scheme  with  reference  to  any  land  within  or  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  their  area,  if  the  authority  satisfy  the  Board  that 
there  is  a  prima  facie  case  for  making  such  a  scheme,  or  may 
authorise  a  local  authority  to  adopt,  with  or  without  any  modifica- 
tions, any  such  scheme  proposed  by  all  or  any  of  the  owners  of 
any  land  with  respect  to  which  the  local  authority  might  themselves 
have  been  authorised  to  prepare  a  scheme. 

(3)  Where  it  is  made  to  appear  to  the  Local  Government  Board 
that  a  piece  of  land  already  built  upon,  or  a  piece  of  land  not  likely 
to  be  used  for  building  purposes,  is  so  situated  with  respect  to  any 
land  likely  to  be  used  for  building  purposes  that  it  ought  to  be 
included  in  any  town  planning  scheme  made  with  respect  to  the 
last-mentioned  land,  the  Board  may  authorise  the  preparation  or 
adoption  of  a  scheme  including  such  piece  of  land  as  aforesaid,  and 
providing  for  the  demolition  or  alteration  of  any  buildings  thereon 
so  far  as  may  be  necessary  for  carrying  the  scheme  into  effect. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  303 

(4)  A  town  planning  scheme  prepared  or  adopted  by  a  local  au- 
thority shall  not  have  effect,  unless  it  is  approved  by  order  of  the 
Local  Government  Board,  and  the  Board  may  refuse  to  approve 
any  scheme  except  with  such  modifications  and  subject  to  such 
conditions  as  they  think  fit  to  impose : 

Provided  that,  before  a  town  planning  scheme  is  approved  by 
the  Local  Government  Board,  notice  of  their  intention  to  do  so 
shall  be  published  in  the  London  or  Edinburgh  Gazette^  as  the 
case  may  be,  and,  if  within  twenty-one  days  from  the  date  of  such 
publication  any  person  or  authority  interested  objects  in  the  pre- 
scribed manner,  the  draft  of  the  order  shall  be  laid  before  each 
House  of  Parliament  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  thirty  days  dur- 
ing the  session  of  Parliament,  and,  if  either  of  those  Houses  before 
the  expiration  of  those  thirty  days  presents  an  address  to  His 
Majesty  against  the  draft,  or  any  part  thereof,  no  further  proceed- 
ings shall  be  taken  thereon,  without  prejudice  to  the  making  of  any 
new  draft  scheme. 

(5)  A  town  planning  scheme,  when  approved  by  the  Local  Gov- 
ernment Board,  shall  have  effect  as  if  it  were  enacted  in  this  Act. 

(6)  A  town  planning  scheme  may  be  varied  or  revoked  by  a 
subsequent  scheme  prepared  or  adopted  and  approved  in  accord- 
ance with  this  Part  of  this  Act,  and  the  Local  Government  Board, 
on  the  application  of  the  responsible  authority,  or  of  any  other 
person  appearing  to  them  to  be  interested,  may  by  order  revoke  a 
town  planning  scheme  if  they  think  that  under  the  special  circum- 
stances of  the  case  the  scheme  should  be  so  revoked. 

(7)  The  expression  "  land  likely  to  be  used  for  building  purposes  " 
shall  include  any  land  likely  to  be  used  as,  or  for  the  purpose  of 
providing,  open  spaces,  roads,  streets,  parks,  pleasure  or  recreation 
grounds,  or  for  the  purpose  of  executing  any  work  upon  or  under 
the  land  incidental  to  a  town  planning  scheme,  whether  in  the 
nature  of  a  building  work  or  not,  and  the  decision  of  the  Local 
Government  Board,  whether  land  is  likely  to  be  used  for  building 
purposes  or  not,  shall  be  final. 


304  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

55.  Contents  of  Town  Plafiniug  Schemes 

(i)  The  Local  Government  Board  may  prescribe  a  set  of  general 
provisions  (or  separate  sets  of  general  provisions  adapted  for  areas 
of  any  special  character)  for  carrying  out  the  general  objects  of 
town  planning  schemes,  and  in  particular  for  dealing  with  the  mat- 
ters set  out  in  the  Fourth  Schedule  to  this  Act,  and  the  general 
provisions,  or  set  of  general  provisions  appropriate  to  the  area  for 
which  a  town  planning  scheme  is  made,  shall  take  effect  as  part  of 
every  scheme,  except  so  far  as  provision  is  made  by  the  scheme 
as  approved  by  the  Board  for  the  variation  or  exclusion  of  any  of 
those  provisions. 

(2)  Special  provisions  shall  in  addition  be  inserted  in  every  town 
planning  scheme  defining  in  such  manner  as  may  be  prescribed  by 
regulations  under  this  Part  of  this  Act  the  area  to  which  the  scheme 
is  to  apply,  and  the  authority  who  are  to  be  responsible  for  enforc- 
ing the  observance  of  the  scheme,  and  for  the  execution  of  any 
works  which  under  the  scheme  or  this  Part  of  this  Act  are  to  be 
executed  by  a  local  authority  (in  this  Part  of  this  Act  referred  to 
as  the  responsible  authority),  and  providing  for  any  matters  which 
may  be  dealt  with  by  general  provisions,  and  otherwise  supplement- 
ing, excluding,  or  varying  the  general  provisions,  and  also  for  deal- 
ing with  any  special  circumstances  or  contingencies  for  which 
adequate  provision  is  not  made  by  the  general  provisions,  and  for 
suspending,  so  far  as  necessary  for  the  proper  carrying  out  of  the 
scheme,  any  statutory  enactments,  byelaws,  regulations,  or  other 
provisions,  under  whatever  authority  made,  which  are  in  operation 
in  the  area  included  in  the  scheme  : 

Provided  that,  where  the  scheme  contains  provisions  suspending 
any  enactment  contained  in  a  public  general  Act,  the  scheme  shall 
not  come  into  force  unless  a  draft  thereof  has  been  laid  before 
each  House  of  Parliament  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  forty  days 
during  the  session  of  Parliament,  and,  if  either  of  those  Houses 
before  the  expiration  of  those  forty  days  presents  an  Address  to 


THE   HOUSINCx  AND   LAND   PROBLEM  305 

His  Majesty  against  the  proposed  suspension  no  further  proceed- 
ings shall  be  taken  on  the  draft,  without  prejudice  to  the  making 
of  any  new  scheme. 

(3)  Where  land  included  in  a  town  planning  scheme  is  in  the  area 
of  more  than  one  local  authority,  or  is  in  the  area  of  a  local  authority 
by  whom  the  scheme  was  not  prepared,  the  responsible  authority 
may  be  one  of  those  local  authorities,  or  for  certain  purposes  of 
the  scheme  one  local  authority  and  for  certain  purposes  another 
local  authority,  or  a  joint  body  constituted  specially  for  the  purpose 
by  the  scheme,  and  all  necessary  provisions  may  be  made  by  the 
scheme  for  constituting  the  joint  body  and  giving  them  the  neces- 
sary powers  and  duties : 

Provided  that,  except  with  the  consent  of  the  London  County 
Council,  no  other  local  authority  shall,  as  respects  any  land  in  the 
county  of  London,  prepare  or  be  responsible  for  enforcing  the 
observance  of  a  town  planning  scheme  under  this  Part  of  this  Act, 
or  for  the  execution  of  any  works  which  under  the  scheme  or  this 
Part  of  this  Act  are  to  be  executed  by  a  local  authority. 

^6.  Regulations  of  the  Local  Government  Board 

(i)  The  Local  Government  Board  may  make  regulations  for 
regulating  generally  the  procedure  to  be  adopted  with  respect  to 
applications  for  authority  to  prepare  or  adopt  a  town  planning 
scheme,  the  preparation  of  the  scheme,  obtaining  the  approval  of 
the  Board  to  a  scheme  so  prepared  or  adopted,  and  any  inquiries, 
reports,  notices,  or  other  matters  required  in  connection  with  the 
preparation  or  adoption  or  the  approval  of  the  scheme  or  prelimi- 
nary thereto,  or  in  relation  to  the  carrying  out  of  the  scheme  or 
enforcing  the  observance  of  the  provisions  thereof. 
(2)  Provision  shall  be  made  by  those  regulations  — 

(a)  for  securing  co-operation  on  the  part  of  the  local  authority 
with  the  owners  and  other  persons  interested  in  the 
land  proposed  to  be  included  in  the  scheme  at  every 


3o6  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

stage  of  the  proceedings,  by  means  of  conferences 
and  such  other  means  as  may  be  provided  by  the 
regulations ; 

(I))  for  seturing  that  notice  of  the  proposal  to  prepare  or 
adopt  the  scheme  should  be  given  at  the  earliest  stage 
possible  to  any  council  interested  in  the  land  ;    and 

(/)  for  dealing  with  the  other  matters  mentioned  in  the  Fifth 
Schedule  to  this  Act. 

57.  Power  to  enforce  Scheme 

(i)  The  responsible  authority  may  at  any  time,  after  giving 
such  notice  as  may  be  provided  by  a  town  planning  scheme  and 
in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  scheme  — 

(a)  remove,  pull  down,  or  alter  any  building  or  other  work  in 

the  area  included  in  the  scheme  which  is  such  as  to 
contravene  the  scheme,  or  in  the  erection  or  carrying 
out  of  which  any  provision  of  the  scheme  has  not  been 
complied  with ;  or 

(b)  execute  any  work  which  it  is  the  duty  of  any  person  to 

execute  under  the  scheme  in  any  case  where  it  appears 
to  the  authority  that  delay  in  the  execution  of  the  work 
would  prejudice  the  efficient  operation  of  the  scheme. 

(2)  Any  expenses  incurred  by  a  responsible  authority  under 
this  section  may  be  recovered  from  the  persons  in  default  in  such 
manner  and  subject  to  such  conditions  as  may  be  provided  by  the 
scheme. 

(3)  If  any  question  arises  whether  any  building  or  work  contra- 
venes a  town  planning  scheme,  or  whether  any  provision  of  a  town 
planning  scheme  is  not  complied  with  in  the  erection  or  carrying 
out  of  any  such  building  or  work,  that  question  shall  be  referred 
to  the  Local  Government  Board,  and  shall,  unless  the  parties 
otherwise  agree,  be  determined  by  the  Board  as  arbitrators,  and 
the  decision  of  the  Board  shall  be  final  and  conclusive  and  binding 
on  all  persons. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  307 

^8.   Compensation  in  Respect  of  Property  injuriously  affected  by 
Scheme^  etc. 

(i)  Any  person  whose  property  is  injuriously  affected  by  the 
making  of  a  town  planning  scheme  shall,  if  he  makes  a  claim  for 
the  purpose  within  the  time  (if  any)  limited  by  the  scheme,  not 
being  less  than  three  months  after  the  date  when  notice  of  the 
approval  of  the  scheme  is  published  in  the  manner  prescribed  by 
regulations  made  by  the  Local  Government  Board,  be  entitled 
to  obtain  compensation  in  respect  thereof  from  the  responsible 
authority. 

(2)  A  person  shall  not  be  entitled  to  obtain  compensation  under 
this  section  on  account  of  any  building  erected  on,  or  contract 
made  or  other  thing  done  with  respect  to,  land  included  in  a 
scheme,  after  the  time  at  which  the  application  for  authority  to 
prepare  the  scheme  was  made,  or  after  such  other  time  as  the 
Local  Government  Board  may  fix  for  the  purpose : 

Provided  that  this  provision  shall  not  apply  as  respects  any 
work  done  before  the  date  of  the  approval  of  the  scheme  for  the 
purpose  of  finishing  a  building  begun  or  of  carrying  out  a  contract 
entered  into  before  the  application  was  made. 

(3)  Where,  by  the  making  of  any  town  planning  scheme,  any 
property  is  increased  in  value,  the  responsible  authority,  if  they 
make  a  claim  for  the  purpose  within  the  time  (if  any)  limited  by 
the  scheme  (not  being  less  than  three  months  after  the  date  when 
notice  of  the  approval  of  the  scheme  is  first  published  in  the 
manner  prescribed  by  regulations  made  by  the  Local  Government 
Board),  shall  be  entitled  to  recover  from  any  person  whose  property 
is  so  increased  in  value  one-half  of  the  amount  of  that  increase. 

(4)  Any  question  as  to  whether  any  property  is  injuriously 
affected  or  increased  in  value  within  the  meaning  of  this  section, 
and  as  to  the  amount  and  manner  of  payment  (whether  by  instal- 
ments or  otherwise)  of  the  sum  which  is  to  be  paid  as  compensation 
under  this  section  or  which  the  responsible  authority  are  entitled  to 


308  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

recover  from  a  person  whose  property  is  increased  in  value,  shall 
be  determined  by  the  arbitration  of  a  single  arbitrator  appointed 
by  the  Local  Government  Board,  unless  the  parties  agree  on  some 
other  method  of  determination. 

(5)  Any  amount  due  under  this  section  as  compensation  to  a 
person  aggrieved  from  a  responsible  authority,  or  to  a  responsible 
authority  from  a  person  whose  property  is  increased  in  value,  may 
be  recovered  summarily  as  a  civil  debt. 

(6)  Where  a  town  planning  scheme  is  revoked  by  an  order  of 
the  Local  Government  Board  under  this  Act,  any  person  who  has 
incurred  expenditure  for  the  purpose  of  complying  with  the  scheme 
shall  be  entitled  to  compensation  in  accordance  with  this  section 
in  so  far  as  any  such  expenditure  is  rendered  abortive  by  reason 
of  the  revocation  of  the  scheme. 

jp.  Limitation  of  Compensation  in  Certain  Cases 

(i)  Where  property  is  alleged  to  be  injuriously  affected  by  rea- 
son of  any  provisions  contained  in  a  town  planning  scheme,  no 
compensation  shall  be  paid  in  respect  thereof  if  or  so  far  as  the 
provisions  are  such  as  would  have  been  enforceable  if  they  had 
been  contained  in  byelaws  made  by  the  local  authority. 

(2)  Property  shall  not  be  deemed  to  be  injuriously  affected  by 
reason  of  the  making  of  any  provisions  inserted  in  a  town  planning 
scheme,  which,  with  a  view  to  securing  the  amenity  of  the  area 
included  in  the  scheme  or  any  part  thereof,  prescribe  the  space 
about  buildings  or  limit  the  number  of  buildings  to  be  erected,  or 
prescribe  the  height  or  character  of  buildings,  and  which  the  Local 
Government  Board,  having  regard  to  the  nature  and  situation  of  the 
land  affected  by  the  provisions,  consider  reasonable  for  the  purpose. 

(3)  Where  a  person  is  entitled  to  compensation  under  this  Part 
of  this  Act  in  respect  of  any  matter  or  thing,  and  he  would  be 
entitled  to  compensation  in  respect  of  the  same  matter  or  thing 
under  any  other  enactment,  he  shall  not  be  entitled  to  compensation 
in  respect  of  that  matter  or  thing  both  under  this  Act  and  under 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  309 

that  other  enactment,  and  shall  not  be  entitled  to  any  greater 
compensation  under  this  Act  than  he  would  be  entitled  to  under 
the  other  enactment. 

60.  Acquisition  of  Land  comprised  in  a  Scheme 

(i)  The  responsible  authority  may,  for  the  purpose  of  a  town 
planning  scheme,  purchase  any  land  comprised  in  such  scheme  by 
agreement,  or  be  authorised  to  purchase  any  such  land  compulsorily 
in  the  same  manner  and  subject  to  the  same  provisions  (including 
any  provision  authorising  the  Local  Government  Board  to  give  di- 
rections as  to  the  payment  and  application  of  any  purchase  money 
or  compensation)  as  a  local  authority  may  purchase  or  be  author- 
ised to  purchase  land  situate  in  an  urban  district  for  the  purposes 
of  Part  III  of  the  Housing  of  the  Working  Classes  Act,  1890,  as 
amended  by  sections  two  and  forty-five  of  this  Act. 

(2)  Where  land  included  within  the  area  of  a  local  authority  is 
comprised  in  a  town  planning  scheme,  and  the  local  authority  are 
not  the  responsible  authority,  the  local  authority  may  purchase  or 
be  authorised  to  purchase  that  land  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
responsible  authority. 

61.  Powers  of  Local  Government  Board  to  make  or  execute 
Town  Planning  Scheme 

(i)  If  the  Local  Government  Board  are  satisfied  on  any  repre- 
sentation, after  holding  a  public  local  inquiry,  that  a  local  authority — 
(a)  have  failed  to  take  the  requisite  steps  for  having  a  satisfac- 
tory town  planning  scheme  prepared  and  approved  in  a 
case  where  a  town  planning  scheme  ought  to  be  made  ;  or 
ij))  have  failed  to  adopt  any  scheme  proposed  by  owners  of  any 
land  in  a  case  where  the  scheme  ought  to  be  adopted  ;  or 
if)  have  unreasonably  refused  to  consent  to  any  modifications 
or  conditions  imposed  by  the  Board  ; 
the  Board  may,  as  the  case  requires,  order  the  local  authority  to 
prepare  and  submit  for  the  approval  of  the  Board  such  a  town 


3IO  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

planning  scheme,  or  to  adopt  the  scheme,  or  to  consent  to  the 
modifications  or  conditions  so  inserted : 

Provided  that,  where  the  representation  is  that  a  local  authority 
have  failed  to  adopt  a  scheme,  the  Local  Government  Board,  in 
lieu  of  making  such  an  order  as  aforesaid,  may  approve  the  pro- 
posed scheme,  subject  to  such  modifications  or  conditions,  if  any, 
as  the  Board  think  fit,  and  thereupon  the  scheme  shall  have  effect 
as  if  it  had  been  adopted  by  the  local  authority  and  approved  by 
the   Board. 

(2)  If  the  Local  Government  Board  are  satisfied  on  any  repre- 
sentation, after  holding  a  local  inquiry,  that  a  responsible  authority 
have  failed  to  enforce  effectively  the  observance  of  a  scheme  which 
has  been  confirmed,  or  any  provisions  thereof,  or  to  execute  any 
works  which  under  the  scheme  or  this  Part  of  this  Act  the  authority 
is  required  to  execute,  the  Board  may  order  that  authority  to  do  all 
things  necessary  for  enforcing  the  observance  of  the  scheme  or  any 
provisions  thereof  effectively,  or  for  executing  any  works  which 
under  the  scheme  or  this  Part  of  this  Act  the  authority  is  required 
to  execute. 

(3)  Any  order  under  this  section  may  be  enforced  by  mandamus. 
[Clauses  62-67  d^^'  ^'^'^'^^  administrative  details,  amendments  to 

former  statutes,  and  application  of  Part  II  of  this  Act  to  London 
and  to  Scotland.] 

Part  III 

County  Medical  Officers,  County  Public  Health  and 
Housing  Committee,  etc. 

68.    County  Medical  Officers 

(i)  Every  county  council  shall  appoint  a  medical  officer  of  health 
under  section  seventeen  of  the  Local  Government  Act,  18S8. 

(2)  The  duties  of  a  medical  officer  of  health  of  a  county  shall 
be  such  duties  as  may  be  prescribed  by  general  order  of  the  Local 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  311 

Government  Board  and  such  other  duties  as  may  be  assigned  to 
him  by  the  county  council. 

(3)  The  power  of  county  councils  and  district  councils  under 
the  said  section  to  make  arrangements  with  respect  to  medical 
officers  of  health  shall  cease,  without  prejudice  to  any  arrangement 
made  previously  to  the  date  of  the  passing  of  this  Act. 

(4)  The  medical  officer  of  health  of  a  county  shall,  for  the  pur- 
poses of  his  duties,  have  the  same  powers  of  entry  on  premises 
as  are  conferred  on  a  medical  officer  of  health  of  a  district  by  or 
under  any  enactment. 

(5)  A  medical  officer  of  health  of  a  county  shall  be  removable 
by  the  county  council  with  the  consent  of  the  Local  Government 
Board  and  not  otherwise. 

(6)  A  medical  officer  of  health  of  a  county  shall  not  be  ap- 
pointed for  a  limited  period  only  : 

Provided  that  the  county  council  may,  with  the  sanction  of  the 
Local  Government  Board,  make  any  temporary  arrangement  for 
the  performance  of  all  or  any  of  the  duties  of  the  medical  officer 
of  health  of  the  county,  and  any  person  appointed  by  virtue  of 
any  such  arrangement  to  perform  those  duties  or  any  of  them 
shall,  subject  to  the  terms  of  his  appointment,  have  all  the 
powers,  duties,  and  liabilities  of  the  medical  officer  of  health 
of   the   county. 

(7)  A  medical  officer  of  health  appointed  after  the  passing  of 
this  Act  under  the  said  section  as  amended  by  this  section  shall 
not  engage  in  private  practice,  and  shall  not  hold  any  other  public 
appointment  without  the  express  written  consent  of  the  Local 
Government  Board. 

(8)  An  order  under  this  section  prescribing  the  duties  of  medical 
officers  of  health  of  a  county  shall  be  communicated  to  the  county 
council  and  shall  be  laid  before  Parliament  as  soon  as  may  be  after 
it  is  made,  and,  if  an  address  is  presented  to  His  Majesty  by  either 
House  of  Parliament  within  the  next  subsequent  twenty-one  days 
on  which  that  House  has  sat  next  after  the  order  is  laid  before  it 


312  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

praying  that  the  order  may  be  annulled,  His  Majesty  in  Council 
may  annul  the  order  and  it  shall  thenceforward  be  void,  but  without 
prejudice  to  the  validity  of  anything  previously  done  thereunder. 
[Clause  69  defines  special  duties  of  clerk  and  medical  officer  of 
health  of  district  council;  and  Clause  70  excepts  Scotiand  and 
London  from  certain  provisions.] 

yi.  Public  Health  and  Housing  Committee  of  County  Council 

(i)  Every  county  council  shall  establish  a  public  health  and 
housing  committee,  and  all  matters  relating  to  the  exercise  and 
performance  by  the  council  of  their  powers  and  duties  as  respects 
public  health  and  the  housing  of  the  working  classes  (except  the 
power  of  raising  a  rate  or  borrowing  money)  shall  stand  referred 
to  the  public  health  and  housing  committee,  and  the  council,  before 
exercising  any  such  powers,  shall,  unless  in  their  opinion  the  matter 
is  urgent,  receive  and  consider  the  report  of  the  public  health  and 
housing  committee  with  respect  to  the  matter  in  question,  and 
the  council  may  also  delegate  to  the  public  health  and  housing 
committee,  with  or  without  restrictions  or  conditions  as  they 
think  fit,  any  of  their  powers  as  respects  public  health  and  the 
housing  of  the  working  classes,  except  the  power  of  raising  a  rate 
or  borrowing  money  and  except  any  power  of  resolving  that  the 
powers  of  a  district  council  in  default  should  be  transferred  to 
the  council. 

(2)  This  section  shall  not  apply  to  Scotland  or  the  London 
County  Council. 

[Clause  72  seeks  to  promote  the  formation  and  extension  of 
building  societies.] 

[Part  IV  of  the  Act  contains  several  supplemental  provisions 
(Clauses  73-76).  Ireland  is  excluded  from  the  operation  of  the 
Act.  An  important  accompanying  Schedule  contains  detailed  pro- 
visions as  to  the  compulsory  acquisition  of  land  by  local  authorities.] 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  313 

Fourth  Schedule  ^ 

Matters  to  be  dealt  luith  by  General  Provismis  prescribed 
by  the  Local  Government  Board 

1.  Streets,  roads,  and  other  ways,  and  stopping  up,  or  diversion 
of  existing  highways. 

2.  Buildings,  structures,  and  erections. 

3.  Open  spaces,  private  and  public. 

4.  The  preservation  of  objects  of  historical  interest  or  natural 
beauty. 

5.  Sewerage,  drainage,  and  sewage  disposal. 

6.  Lighting. 

7.  Water  supply. 

8.  Ancillary  or  consccjuential  works. 

9.  Extinction  or  variation  of  private  rights  of  way  and  other 
easements. 

10.  Dealing  with  or  disposal  of  land  acquired  by  the  responsible 
authority  or  by  a  local  authority. 

1 1 .  Power  of  entry  and  inspection. 

12.  Power  of  the  responsible  authority  to  remove,  alter,  or  de- 
molish any  obstructive  work. 

13.  Power  of  the  responsible  authority  to  make  agreements  with 
owners,  and  of  owners  to  make  agreements  with  one  another. 

14.  Power  of  the  responsible  authority  or  a  local  authority  to 
accept  any  money  or  property  for  the  furtherance  of  the  object  of 
any  town  planning  scheme,  and  provision  for  regulating  the  admin- 
istration of  any  such  money  or  property  and  for  the  exemption 
of  any  assurance  with  respect  to  money  or  property  so  accepted 
from  enrolment  under  the  Mortmain  and  Charitable  Uses  Act, 
1888.- 

15.  Application  with  the  necessary  modifications  and  adaptations 
of  statutory  enactments. 

1  Cf.  Clause  55.  2  ji  &  52  Vict.,  ch.  42. 


3H 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


1 6.  Carr^'ing  out  and  supplementing  the  provisions  of  this  Act 
for  enforcing  schemes. 

1 7 .  Limitation  of  time  for  operation  of  scheme. 

1 8.  Co-operation  of  the  responsible  authority  with  the  owners 
of  land  included  in  the  scheme  or  other  persons  interested  by 
means  of  conferences,  etc. 

19.  Charging  on  the  inheritance  of  any  land  the  value  of  which 
is  increased  by  the  operation  of  a  town  planning  scheme  the  sum 
required  to  be  paid  in  respect  of  that  increase,  and  for  that  pur- 
pose applying,  with  the  necessar}'  adaptations,  the  provisions  of  any 
enactments  dealing  with  charges  for  improvements  of  land. 


Extract  §j 

CONSERVATIVE  OPPOSITION  TO  THE  DEVELOPMENT  BILL 

(yLord  Robert  Cecil,  Corufnotts,  September  6,  iQog) 

Lord  Robert  Cecil  ^ :  .  .  .  The  Bill  consists  of  two  entirely 
distinct  parts.  The  road  part,  which  occupies  by  far  the  larger 
number  of  the  Clauses,  is,  in  my  view,  by  far  the  least  important 
part  of  the  measure.  With  the  general  principle  of  the  roads  in  this 
country  no  longer  being  regarded  as  a  purely  local  interest  I  find 
myself  in  accord.  The  tendency  of  all  road  legislation  has  been 
gradually  to  extend  the  area  over  which  the  upkeep  of  those  roads 
is  spread,  and  I  do  not  myself  dispute  that  the  time  has  now  arrived 
when  the  Imperial  Exchequer  may  fairly  be  asked  to  bear  some 
portion  of  the  upkeep  of  the  main  roads  of  the  countr}' ;  and  if 
this  Bill  were  consistent  in  any  proposal  to  make  grants  in  aid  of 
road  upkeep  to  the  road  authorities  who  have  charge  of  the  roads 
of  this  country  on  some  fixed  and  definite  principle  which  would 
preclude  any  possibility  of  local  or  political  favouritism,  I  should 
not  certainly  be  opposing  that  part  of  the  Bill. 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  10,  col.  907  sqq. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  315 

But  the  Bill,  in  fact,  embodies  a  very  different  scheme.  In  the 
first  place,  it  proposes  to  constitute  a  new  local  authority,  which  is 
to  interfere  with,  and  in  some  respects  to  supersede,  the  existing 
local  authority  in  the  control  of  the  roads.  I  think  that  this  Bill 
involves  such  very  important  considerations  that  I  do  not  wish  to 
occupy  time  unduly  in  dealing  with  smaller  criticisms,  but  certainly 
it  does  appear  to  me  that  the  chaos  which  is  likely  to  be  introduced 
into  local  administration  by  adding  yet  another  local  authority  to 
deal  with  strictly  local  affairs  is  a  matter  which  deserves  in  itself 
the  very  serious  consideration  of  this  House.  But,  in  addition,  this 
part  of  the  Bill  is  designed  exclusively  for  the  benefit  of  one  sec- 
tion of  the  community.  ... 

It  is  proposed,  among  other  things,  to  drive  through  this  coun- 
try great  strips  of  land  a  quarter  of  a  mile  broad  for  new  motor 
roads  on  which  no  speed  limit  is  to  be  imposed.  For  that  purpose 
power  is  to  be  taken  under  the  Bill  to  raise  a  loan,  I  understand, 
of  no  less  than  ^4,000,000,  besides  the  amount  that  is  to  be  spent 
annually  on  the  upkeep  and  improvement  of  roads  for  the  purpose 
of  motor  traffic.  And  the  land  —  it  is  important  the  House  should 
understand  this  —  is  to  be  acquired  by  those  bureaucratic  methods 
which  are  so  dear  to  the  present  Government.  They  have  incorpo- 
rated in  the  Schedule  what  are  called  small  holding  terms,  which 
means  that  no  inquiry  is  to  be  held  as  to  the  desirability  of  improve- 
ments to  be  carried  out  under  the  Bill  unless  the  Treasury  shall 
order  it,  and  in  any  case  the  land  is  to  be  purchased  on  the  greatly 
modified  terms  which  attend  compulsory  purchase.  I  think  that, 
to  use  a  colloquial  phrase,  is  a  pretty  tall  order. 

But  when  you  come  to  the  development  part  of  the  scheme,  all 
that  is  really  most  moderate  and  infinitesimal  by  comparison.  .  .  . 
The  proposal  is  that  the  Treasury  may  grant  either  by  way  of 
free  grant  or  by  way  of  loan  money  not  only  for  the  purposes  of 
forestry  and  developing  agriculture  —  though  even  in  that  respect 
the  words  are  extremely  wide,  because  they  include  the  extension 
of  the  principle  of  the  Small  Holdings  Act  and  the  adoption  of  any 


3l6  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

other  means  which  appear  calculated  to  develop  agriculture  and 
rural  industry  —  but  it  is  clearly  proposed  by  this  Bill  that  this 
grant  may  be  made  for  the  reclamation  and  drainage  of  land,  the 
general  improvement  of  rural  transport,  including  the  making  of 
light  railways,  the  construction  and  improvement  of  harbours,  the 
construction  and  improvement  of  canals,  the  developing  and  im- 
provement of  fisheries,  and  for  "  any  other  purpose  calculated  to 
promote  the  economic  development  of  the  United  Kingdom."  It 
would  really  puzzle  most  hon.  Members  to  find  a  single  department 
of  commercial  or  industrial  activity  which  could  not  be  described 
by  the  words  "  or  any  other  purpose  calculated  to  promote  the  eco- 
nomic development  of  the  United  Kingdom."  [Cheers.]  I  am  not 
at  all  surprised  that  hon.  Members  below  the  gangway  cheer  that 
statement,  because  it  is  part  of  the  Socialist  programme. 

I  only  stop  for  a  moment  at  Clause  2  to  note  the  words  in  para- 
graph (c)  of  subsection  (i)  that  one  of  the  sources  from  which  the 
Development  Fund  is  to  be  replenished  and  derived  is  "  any  profits 
or  proceeds  derived  from  the  expenditure  of  any  advance  which 
by  the  terms  on  which  the  advance  was  made  are  to  be  paid  to 
the  Treasury,"  making  it  abundantly  clear  that  under  this  Bill  not 
merely  unremunerative,  unproductive,  and  unprofitable  expenditure 
for  agricultural  instruction  and  the  like  is  contemplated,  but  works 
of  a  profit-bearing  nature,  like  any  other  works  indulged  in  by  a 
private  individual. 

Sir  G.  Parker  :  State-trading. 

Lord  R.  Cecil  :  Of  course,  it  is  State-trading ;  clearly  that 
is  what  it  means. 

Clause  3  is  almost  common  form  in  any  Government  bill  now, 
and  merely  provides  that  the  Treasury  shall  be  entitled  to  direct 
and  draw  up  regulations  to  carry  out  anything  they  like. 

Then  we  come  to  the  most  remarkable  clause  of  the  whole  Bill, 
and  that  is  Clause  4,  which  provides  that  "  the  Board  of  Agricul- 
ture and  Fisheries"  —  I  thank  the  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade 
for  the  phrase  "  Administrative  Order"  —  may  without  any  inquiry 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  317 

or  any  consideration  at  all  make  compulsory  acquisition  of  land 
throughout  the  whole  of  the  Ignited  Kingdom.  I  really  do  not 
believe  —  in  fact,  I  am  quite  sure  that  such  a  proposition  has  never 
been  submitted  to  Parliament.  I  cannot  believe  the.  Government 
itself  realises  what  that  proposition  involves.  I  do  not  wish  to 
linger  over  the  terms  on  which  the  land  is  to  be  acquired.  They 
do  not  seem  to  me  specially  unfair.  I  do  not  myself  see  why, 
for  such  a  purpose,  the  allowance  for  compulsory  purchase  should 
not  be  allowed,  but  I  do  not  really  care  about  that,  and  the  tri- 
bunal is  fair  enough  as  far  as  compensation  is  concerned.  The 
acquisition  of  any  land  might  mean  that  any  railway  might  be  ac- 
quired under  the  words  of  this  Clause.  There  is  nothing  to  pre- 
vent the  complete  nationalisation  of  all  the  railways  and  all  the 
land  of  the  country  under  Clauses  1,2,  and  4.  I  do  not  suppose 
for  a  moment,  and  I  am  not  suggesting,  that  is  what  the  Gov- 
ernment intends  —  of  course  not  — •  but  that  is  the  framework  of 
their  Kill.  That  is  what  the  Bill  gives  them  power  to  do  under 
these  provisions. 

What  are  the  safeguards  that  are  suggested  ?  As  far  as  I  can 
see  the  only  two  are  these:  it  is  suggested  that  only  ;^5oo, 000  per 
year  for  four  years  is  to  be  allowed  for  these  purposes.  That  is 
the  suggested  provision  of  Clause  2,  but  when  you  look  at  Clause  2 
it  does  not  contain  any  such  limit  at  all.  The  words  of  the  Clause 
are :  "  .  .  .  the  Development  Fund  into  which  shall  be  paid  (a) 
such  moneys  as  may  from  time  to  time  be  provided  by  Parliament 
for  the  purposes  of  this  part  of  this  Act."  That  is  quite  general. 
Then  in  subsection  (2)  of  Clause  2  there  is  the  provision,  "  There 
shall  be  charged  on  and  issued  out  of  the  Consolidated  Fund  in  the 
year  ending  the  thirty-first  day  of  March,  nineteen  hundred  and 
eleven,  and  in  each  of  the  next  succeeding  four  years,  the  sum  of 
five  hundred  thousand  pounds."  What  it  comes  to  is  this,  that 
there  is  an  attempt  to  enact  that  at  least  ;{J"5 00,000  should  be  spent 
every  year  on  these  purposes,  and  there  is  no  superior  limit  what- 
ever.   Any  sum  which  could  be  obtained  from  a  docile  majority  of 


3l8  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  House  of  Commons  might  be  allocated  to  these  purposes,  so 
that  the  suggested  limit  of  ;^5  00,000  is  absolutely  non-existent. 
Then  there  is  the  provision  of  an  Advisory  Committee,  and  we  are 
seriously  asked  to  regard  that  as  some  safeguard.  This  Advisory 
Committee  is  to  be  appointed  by  the  particular  Government  that 
brought  in  the  Bill,  but  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  who  they  are 
to  be.  They  may  be,  as  the  hon.  and  learned  Member  for  Louth 
suggests,  Lumley.  At  any  rate,  we  have  very  good  ground  for 
knowing  that  the  Government  are  not  at  all  moved  by  the  fact  that 
Advisory  Committees,  or  persons  that  they  appoint  to  make  inquiries 
and  report,  report  in  favour  or  against  a  particular  thing.   .  .   . 

That  is  the  scheme  of  the  Bill,  and  it  appears  to  me  it  lays  itself 
open  to  two  very  serious  objections.  I  think  it  is  likely  to  produce 
a  great  waste  of  public  money,  and  I  think  it  is  almost  certain  to 
produce  a  very  grave  danger  of  political  corruption.  We  have  not 
the  experience  they  have  in  foreign  countries  of  the  working  of 
such  schemes  as  this.  I  believe  that  a  scheme  of  this  kind  is  in 
operation  in  some  form  or  another  in  almost  all  our  Colonies  and 
in  several  foreign  countries.  I  see,  for  instance,  that  a  Mr.  Wise 
has  published  a  work  on  Australia  recently,  in  which  he  says  that 
one  of  the  most  dangerous  classes  of  politicians  in  that  country  are 
the  "  roads  and  bridges  men,"  who  are  described  in  this  way, 
"  Their  value  to  their  constituents  is  apt  to  be  expressed  in  terms 
of  the  public  expenditure  in  their  district."' 

I  do  not  want  to  go  unnecessarily  into  that  aspect  of  the  ques- 
tion. Everyone  who  knows  anything  of  political  life  in  many  of 
our  Colonies  knows  that  this  powgr  of  executing  public  works  in 
the  various  constituencies  is  one  of  the  chief  political  instruments 
belonging  to  the  Ministry  of  the  day.  I  was  told  the  other  day, 
and  it  is  common  talk  in  Canada,  that  the  wavering  constituency 
always  voted  in  the  same  way  as  the  majority  of  the  country  appears 
to  be  likely  to  decide,  so  that  they  may  obtain  a  share  of  loaves 
and  fishes  when  the  Government  comes  into  power.  A  friend  of 
mine  described  to  me  how  he  saw  a  large  army  of  workmen  engaged 


THE  HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  319 

in  repairing  a  wall  of  a  public  building  in  one  of  our  Colonies.  He 
asked  how  it  was  so  many  men  appeared  to  be  engaged  in  so 
trivial  a  work.  He  was  rebuked  for  his  simplicity,  and  told  that  a 
General  Election  was  immediately  in  prospect.  It  is  not  only  so 
in  our  Colonies.  I  am  sure,  and  I  do  not  wish  to  exaggerate,  they 
have  had  a  difficult  problem  to  face  in  a  new  country,  and  no  one 
wishes  less  than  I  do  to  exaggerate  failings  that  may  have  occurred 
in  connection  with  that  very  difficult  problem.   .   .   . 

With  all  those  examples  before  us,  I  do  ask  the  House  and  hon. 
Members  very  seriously  to  consider  how  this  would  work  in  our 
own  country.  Have  we  any  right  to  suppose  that  it  would  work 
materially  better  here  than  in  other  countries .-'  Let  us  take  it  gen- 
erally. Is  it  not  almost  certain  that  one  of  the  duties  of  every 
Member  of  Parliament  who  sat  at  any  rate  for  a  country  constitu- 
ency would  be  to  extort  from  the  Government  of  the  day  as  much 
as  he  could  in  order  to  develop  the  various  districts  which  were 
represented  ?  In  addition  to  the  demand  for  the  appointment  of 
magistrates,  would  it  not  be  one  of  the  favourite  employments  not 
only  of  Radical,  but  of  Tory  Members  of  Parliament,  to  try  and 
secure  for  the  locality  the  largest  share  or  slice  of  the  Development 
Fund  ?  It  is  a  very  delicate  matter  to  enlarge  upon,  but  there  are 
constituencies  already  in  this  country  which  benefit  largely  by  ex- 
penditure from  public  sources,  and  it  would  be  mere  affectation  to 
conceal  the  fact  that  those  who  represent  them  have  perpetually 
pressed  upon  the  Government  the  expenditure  of  public  money  in 
their  localities  in  order  to  please  their  constituents.  One  can  see 
that  that  would  be  the  ordinary  course  of  business  under  which  we 
should  live.  Just  conceive  what  might  happen  at  a  critical  bye- 
election,  when,  perhaps,  a  Member  of  the  Government  was  seek- 
ing reelection  on  promotion.  I  can  well  conceive  the  telegram  that 
would  come  from  the  party  managers  demanding  some  great  ex- 
penditure on  a  harbour  in,  say,  a  division  of  Yorkshire,  in  order 
to  secure  the  return  of  the  newly-appointed  Chancellor  of  the 
Duchy.    It  is  quite  true  that  now  somewhat  similar  demands  take 


320  BRITISH    SOCIAL   POLITICS 

place,  but  they  generally  seem  to  result  in  abortive  projects  of 
legislation.  But  seriously,  does  anybody  doubt  that  at  a  bye-election 
a  great  deal  of  political  pressure  would  be  brought  to  bear  upon 
the  Government  of  the  day  to  spend  money  out  of  this  Vote  ? 

That  is  not  the  only  thing.  1  have  no  doubt  myself  that  when 
a  controversial  measure  was  before  the  Parliament,  and  it  was 
important  to  secure  in  its  support  the  votes  of  a  particular  section 
of  this  House,  the  chiefs  of  that  section  would  demand  from  the 
Government  of  the  day  some  promise  of  the  expenditure  of  pub- 
lic money  out  of  the  Development  Fund  to  benefit  the  part  of  the 
Kingdom  from  which  they  came.  I  have  not  the  slightest  doubt 
of  that,  because  it  has  already  occurred.  Everybody  knows  that 
considerable  negotiations  have  been  going  on  between  the  Govern- 
ment and  the  Irish  party  in  order  to  obtain  from  that  party  sup- 
port for  certain  portions  of  the  Finance  ]]ill.  The  leader  of  that 
party,  on  July  4  last,  made  a  speech  at  Arklow,  reported  in  the 
T'nncs  of  July  5,  in  which,  judging  from  the  tone  of  the  speech, 
he  was  defending  himself  against  certain  critics  in  Ireland  who 
thought  he  had  been  too  complacent  with  the  Government  in  ref- 
erence to  the  Finance  Bill ;  and  he  set  out  in  considerable  detail 
the  terms  of  the  changes  which  the  Government  had  agreed  upon 
in  the  Finance  Bill,  and  which  about  two  months  later  they  com- 
municated to  the  House  of  Commons.  In  addition  to  that,  this 
very  striking  paragraph  occurs  in  the  speech : 

Out  of  the  Development  Fund  it  was  proposed  to  create  he  had  reason 
to  know  that  within  the  next  twelve  months  money  would  assuredly  be  pro- 
vided for  the  drainage  of  the  Barrow  and  the  Bann  and  other  rivers  which 
were  spreading  desolation  and  ruin  by  their  flooding.  Money  would  also 
be  available  which  could  be  used  to  facilitate  the  purchase  and  amalgama- 
tion of  Irish  railways  under  an  Irish  local  authority. 

That  has  actually  been  done  before  the  Bill  has  even  been  read  a 
second  time  in  the  House  of  Commons.  .  .  . 

I  say  that  that  is  a  conclusive  example  of  the  way  in  which  this 
Development  Fund  may  be  —  and  if  the  present  Chancellor  of 


THE   HOUSING  AND   LAND   PROBLEM  32 1 

the  Exchequer  remains  in  oflfice  will  be  —  used,  in  order  to  secure 
political  support.  We  have  only  to  turn  to  the  speech  of  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  Board  of  Trade  on  Saturday  last  to  see  that  this  is  all 
part  of  a  gigantic  scheme  to  bribe  the  electorate. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  Do  I  understand  the  Noble  Lord  really  to 
suggest  that  there  is  any  pledge  by  the  Government  to  give  money 
out  of  this  Development  Fund  for  the  draining  of  the  Barrow  and 
the  Bann,  and  the  nationalisation  of  Irish  railways  ?  If  he  or  any- 
body else  says  so,  it  is  not  an  accurate  statement.  Nothing  of  the 
kind  has  been  done. 

Mr.  John  O'Connor  :  Is  the  Noble  Lord  aware  that  the  Leader 
of  the  Opposition  in  the  year  1888  promised  ^10,000  for  these 
drainage  works  ? 

Mr.  Speaker  :  That  has  no  relevancy  whatever  to  the  matter 
under  discussion. 

Lord  R.  Cecil  :  I  certainly  suggest  that  these  words  occur  in 
the  report  in  the  Times  of  the  speech  of  the  hon.  and  learned 
Member  for  Waterford  on  July  4  at  Arklow :  "  Out  of  the  De- 
velopment Fund  it  was  proposed  to  create  he  had  reason  to  know 
that  within  the  next  months  money  would  assuredly  be  provided 
for  the  draining  of  the  Barrow  and  the  Bann." 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  I  know  nothing  whatever  about  the  state- 
ment. It  may,  or  may  not,  be  ah  accurate  report.  All  I  can  say, 
as  Minister  in  charge  of  the  Bill,  is  that  no  such  promise  has  been 
made  to  anybody. 

Lord  R.  Cecil  :  Of  course,  I  fully  accept  the  statement  of  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman  that,  as  far  as  he  is  concerned,  no  such  state- 
ment has  been  made  ;  but  I  do  not  think  he  can  be  quite  sure  that 
no  such  statement  has  been  made  on  behalf  of  the  Government. 
There  are  other  Members  of  the  Government  besides  the  right 
hon.  Gentleman. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  Really  I  think  the  Noble  Lord  is  a  little 
unfair.  Does  he  really  suggest  that  any  Member  of  the  Govern- 
ment has  given  a  pledge  affecting  the  Treasury  to  the  extent  of  — 


322  BRITISH   SOCIAL   POLITICS 

I  do  not  know  what  it  would  be ;  I  should  say  it  would  be  an 
enormous  sum  —  [An  Hon.  Member  :  Millions]  —  without  even 
intimating  it  to  anybody  representing  the  Treasury  ? 

Lord  R.  Cecil  :  I  really  have  not  the  slightest  idea  how  this 
Government  does  its  work.  All  I  can  say  is  that  this  statement 
was  made  publicly  more  than  two  months  ago ;  it  was  reported  in 
the  Times,  and  no  contradiction  whatever  has  been  given. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  At  the  first  moment  it  is  brought  to  my 
notice,  which  is  this  moment,  I  give  it  an  emphatic  contradiction. 

Lord  R.  Cecil  :  It  only  shows  how  very  unfortunate  this  legis- 
lation is,  because  apparently  the  lion,  and  learned  Gentleman  the 
Leader  of  the  Irish  party,  who  is  a  most  accurate  man,  as  I  am 
sure  every  Member  of  this  House  knows,  has  apparently  made 
that  statement  in  the  course  of  his  speech.  It  set  out  with  great 
accuracy  this  offer,  which,  he  says,  the  Government  have  made. 

However,  if  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  says  it  is  inaccurate,  it 
really  makes  very  little  difference  to  the  strength  of  my  argument, 
because  it  shows  the  kind  of  thing  which  is  expected  by  this  Bill, 
and  the  kind  of  pressure  that  will  be  put  upon  Finance  Ministers 
in  the  future,  whether  this  particular  Finance  Minister  or  not.  A 
Bill  of  this  kind,  constructed  in  this  way,  is  the  greatest  engine  of 
political  corruption  which  has  been  attempted  to  be  carried  in  this 
House  since  the  days  of  Fox's  India  Bill.  Hon.  Gentlemen  oppo- 
site make  a  great  accusation  against  a  policy  which  is  favoured  by 
several  of  my  hon.  and  right  hon.  Friends  that  it  will  lead  to  great 
corruption  of  public  life.  [An  Hon.  Member  :  So  it  will.]  Yes, 
but  I  say  deliberately  that  the  power  of  corruption  under  any 
scheme  of  Tariff  Reform  that  has  ever  been  suggested  by  a  re- 
sponsible statesman  is  as  nothing  to  the  power  for  corruption  in 
this !  This  'is  not  confined  to  municipalities  or  public  authorities. 
Anybody  in  the  world  may  receive  a  grant  of  public  money  out  of 
this  Development  Fund  in  order  to  press  forward  some  local  in- 
dustry. In  what  possible  respect  does  this  differ,  except  in  the 
wording,  from  the  ordinary'  system  of  bounties  which  prevails  in 


•    THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  323 

protected  countries  ?  The  thing  is  absolutely  on  "  all  fours."  There 
is  no  distinction  whatever.  To  my  mind  this  Bill  is  thoroughly  un- 
sound finance.  I  believe,  however  carried  out,  it  will  result  in  a 
colossal  waste  of  public  money.  I  believe  myself  —  and  this  is  the 
worst  part  of  it  —  that  it  will  constitute  a  very  serious  danger  to 
national  political  purity. 

It  is  advocated  upon  the  ground  of  developing  national  pros- 
perity. I  believe  that  to  be  a  complete  misapprehension  of  the 
foundation  upon  which  national  prosperity  rests.  I  do  not  believe 
for  a  moment  you  can  secure  national  prosperity  in  an  old  country 
like  this  by  distributing  public  money  in  doles  to  this  or  that  com- 
mercial interest.  That  is  not  what  the  prosperity  of  the  country 
depends  upon.  The  prosperity  of  the  country  depends  upon 
national  character.  I  can  conceive  no  greater  and  more  dangerous 
attack  upon  national  character  than  holding  out  this  bait  of  gigantic 
sums  of  money  which  may  be  granted  to  this  or  that  industry  in 
different  parts  of  the  country.  A  clause  of  this  Bill  provides  that 
in  considering  how  the  money  is  to  be  distributed  regard  is  to  be 
had  to  the  state  of  employment  in  the  various  districts.  What  does 
that  amount  to  ?  An  hon.  Member  comes  and  demands  from  the 
Finance  Minister  a  grant  of  public  money.  The  reply  is,  "  You 
ask  for  this  money,  but  your  scheme  is  really  not  worth  the  assist- 
ance of  the  State."  "  Oh,  but,"  says  the  hon.  Member,  "  there  is 
a  great  deal  of  unemployment  in  my  district,  and  you  are  bound 
to  consider  that  in  making  this  grant."  [An  Hon.  Member  : 
Why  not  ?]  Does  anyone  doubt  how  that  will  end  ?  It  mean's  a 
grant  of  public  money  purely  directed  to  the  relief  of  individuals. 
It  will  destroy  or  seriously  injure  the  character  of  the  inhabitants 
of  this  country.  Apart  from  its  grotesque  finance  of  taking  out. 
of  one  pocket  by  taxing  what  you  are  going,  to  put  into  the  other 
pocket  by  doles,  it  will  destroy  the  very  foundation  upon  which 
the  prosperity  of  the  country  rests  and  its  pride  of  place  —  at  any 
rate,  of  its  place  of  predominance  —  amongst  the  civilised  Powers 
of  the  world. 


324  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


Extract  5^ 

REPLY   TO   CONSERVATIVE   OPPOSITION   TO   DEVELOP- 
MENT BILL 

(J\fr.  David  Lloyd  George,  Chaftcellor  of  the  Excheqite?;  Coin;nons, 
September  d,  iqoq) 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  ^ :  This  has  been  a  very  interesting  and  a 
very  significant  debate.  There  is  one  characteristic  of  the  debate 
which  I  think  has  considerable  significance,  and  that  is  that  the 
attack  on  the  Bill  has  been  confined  exclusively  to  non-agricultural 
Members.  Up  to  the  present  we  have  not  had  a  single  Member  for 
an  agricultural  constituency  sitting  on  the  other  side  of  the  House 
attacking  the  proposals  of  the  Government  for  the  aid  of  agricul- 
ture. I'he  Members  who  have  spoken  for  agriculture  represent 
town  constituencies.  The  Noble  Lord  opposite  [Lord  R.  Cecil] 
has  spoken  for  the  agricultural  community  of  Marylebone.  The 
Noble  Lord  [Viscount  Morpeth]  has  spoken  for  the  market  gar- 
deners of  Birmingham.  'The  right  hon.  Gentleman  the  Member 
for  Wimbledon  [Mr.  Chaplin]  approves  of  the  Bill  — 

Mr.  Chaplin  :  The  objects  of  the  first  part  of  the  Bill. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  said  that  he 
approved  of  the  object  of  the  Bill  so  long  as  the  Bill  was  not  car- 
ried. The  Bill  is  a  first-rate  one,  but  if  the  Government  mean  to 
carry  it,  it  will  have  his  whole-hearted  opposition. 

Mr.  Chaplin  :  I  am  sure  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  does  not 
wish  to  misrepresent  me.  What  I  really  said  was  that  I  approved 
.in  the  main  of  the  objects  of  the  first  part  of  the  Bill,  but  that  I 
disapprove  altogether  of  the  machinery  by  which  those  objects 
were  to  be  carried  into  effect.  I  added  that  the  Bill  was  of  such 
importance  that  I  did  not  think  it  could  be  properly  examined  at 
this  period  of  the  year  during  a  Session  like  the  present,  and  that 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  lo,  col.  961  sqq. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  325 

if  any  attempt  was  made  to  force  it  through  the  House  without 
due  and  proper  examination,  I  should  oppose  its  passage  to  the 
best  of  my  ability. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  will  have  every 
opportunity  of  examining  the  Bill  and  of  criticising  any  details  to 
which  he  may  object. 

Mr.  Chaplin  :  When  ? 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  The  Session  is  not  over  by  any  means. 
We  will  afford  an  opportunity.  After  the  speech  of  the  right  hon. 
Gentleman  on  the  second  reading  of  the  Budget  I  really  expected 
something  better  from  him,  but  I  am  grievously  disappointed. 
The  Noble  Lord  the  Member  for  Marylebone  [Lord  R.  Cecil]  I 
expected  opposition  from.  The  hon.  Baronet  the  Member  for  the 
City  [Sir  F.  Banbury]  I  also  expected  opposition  from. 

Sir  F.  Banbury  :  You  will  get  it. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  They  do  not  agree  with  anything,  not 
even  with  each  other ;  therefore,  I  did  not  expect  any  agreement 
from  them.  But  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  [Mr.  Chaplin]  on  the 
second  reading  of  the  Budget  devoted  nearly  the  whole  of  his 
speech  to  passionately  pleading  that  he  was  the  man  who  dis- 
covered this  idea.  He  discovered  the  North  Pole ;  I  only  got 
there  after  him.  He  explained  at  great  length  how  he  started 
from,  I  think,  Dublin  with  the  Tariff  Reform  Commission  on  a 
voyage  of  discovery  and  had  found  it ;  he  claimed  to  be  the  real 
discoverer,  to  whom  all  the  credit  of  the  distinction  belonged.  He 
having  taken  that  line,  I  naturally  expected  his  assistance  now  that 
I  have  tried  to  develop  the  idea  —  his  idea,  his  child.  I  thought 
that  as  a  fond  parent,  at  any  rate,  he  would  have  assisted  me  in 
protecting  his  child  against  the  assassins  who  sit  behind  him.  In- 
stead of  that,  he  threatens  the  most  virulent  opposition  under 
certain  conditions,  and  he  does  not  seem  at  all  anxious  that  the 
Bill  should  be  carried.  On  the  contrary,  I  do  not  think  I  should  be 
doing  him  any  injustice  if  I  said  that  on  the  whole  the  right  hon. 
Gentleman  would  be  better  pleased  if  the  Bill  did  not  go  through 


326  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  House  of  Commons  during  the  present  Session  of  Parliament. 
I  really  expected  better  treatment  from  him  at  any  rate. 

The  Noble  Lord  [Lord  R,  Cecil]  started  his  speech  by  attacking 
me  for  not  having  made  a  statement  in  opening  the  proceedings 
on  the  Bill.  He  said  that  it  was  another  insult  to  the  House  of 
Commons.  [Sir  F.  Banbury  :  Hear,  hear.]  I  see  that  his  com- 
rade ad  hoc  quite  agrees  with  him.  The  Noble  Lord  is  rather  in 
the  habit  of  lecturing  Ministers  in  the  House  of  Commons  with- 
out adequate  experience.  His  experience  is  confined  to  this  single 
Parliament,  but  no  one  would  imagine  it,  either  from  his  gifts  or 
from  the  rather  superior  tone  which  he  adopts.  Does  he  know  what 
happened  in  the  last  Parliament  ?  The  Education  Bill  of  1902  was 
moved  by  the  lifting  of  the  hat  of  the  Minister.  On  the  Licensing 
Bill  of  1904,  a  highly  controversial  measure,  no  Minister  spoke 
until  much  later  in  the  evening  than  the  hour  at  which  I  have  risen 
to-night.  In  the  present  case  I  had  already  explained  the  object 
of  the  Bill  in  my  Budget  speech,^  at  much  too  great  length  I  admit 
—  for  about  twenty  minutes.  I  circulated  a  full  statement  on  the 
first  reading.  I  have  simply  followed  the  precedent  of  the  Leader 
of  the  Opposition,  who  is  certainly  a  more  distinguished  authority 
than  the  Noble  Lord  and  who  would  not  insult  the  House  of 
Commons,  in  simply  waiting  for  two  or  three  hours  until  I  knew 
the  general  line  of  criticism. 

The  Noble  Lord  has  laid  down  some  very  remarkable  doctrines. 
He  said  that  whenever  rich  motorists  were  taxed  it  was  the  work- 
ing class  who  paid.  That  is  a  very  remarkable  doctrine.  Why  not 
extend  it  ?  Is  it  not  the  simplest  plan  to  tax  the  rich  people,  if  it 
is  the  other  classes  who  pay  ?  The  cost  of  collection  would  be  so 
much  reduced.  You  would  simply  send  a  demand  note  to  these  few 
thousand  people  and  say  :  "  Would  you  mind  paying  us  ?  Of  course, 
it  is  not  you  who  will  pay ;  you  are  simply  the  agents.  You  just 
sign  the  cheque.  The  money  will  all  come  back  to  you."  It  is  so 
much  simpler.  The  rich  man  with  a  motor  car  of  60  horse-power 
1  Cf.  infra,  p.  361. 


The  housing  and  land  problem  327 

Simply  signs  the  cheque ;  it  is  the  poor  pedestrian  on  the  road, 
covered  with  dust,  who  pays.  When  the  rich  millionaire  signs 
the  cheque  for  £^o  or  ^^50  it  is  the  litde  market  gardener  along 
the  roadside  who  pays.  It  is  a  very  simple  method  of  taxation. 
You  just  get  these  few  people  to  sign  the  cheque  —  that  is  the 
best  method  of  making  the  whole  community  pay.  That  is  the 
doctrine  laid  down  by  the  Noble  Lord,  and  it  may  be  worth  con- 
sidering. I  can  quite  conceive  that  some  day  or  other  he  will  be  a 
member  of  a  Socialist  Ministry  defending  a  Socialist  Budget,  de- 
fending the  exclusive  taxation  of  the  rich,  because  it  is  not  they 
who  really  pay,  but  somebody  else.  That  is  a  very  remarkable 
doctrine  to  come  from  him.  [An  Hon.  Member  :  It  did  not  come 
from  him.]    I  have  just  quoted  his  words. 

As  usual,  the  Noble  Lord  discovered  Socialism  here.  All  I  can 
say  is  that  some  of  the  least  Socialistic  States  in  the  world  have 
indulged  in  experiments  of  this  character.  Denmark  is  certainly 
not  a  Socialistic  State ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  probably  the  most 
individualistic  State  in  Europe.  It  is  a  community  of  peasant  pro- 
prietors. Yet  in  Denmark  they  have  already  engaged  in  these 
experiments,  for  I  forget  how  long  exactly,  but  twenty  or  thirty 
years,  and  with  very  great  success. 

Earl  Winterton  made  a  remark  which  was  inaudible  in  the 
Press  Gallery. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  Yes,  but  they  do  not  grow  turnips  in 
Copenhagen. 

Earl  'Winterton  :  The  right  hon.  Gentleman,  I  think,  is  rather 
unfair  to  me  in  his  answer  to  my  interruption.  He  said  :  "  Denmark 
is  the  most  individualistic  country  in  Europe."  I  say  it  is  one  of 
the  most  Socialistic. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  The  Noble  Lord  is  absolutely  wrong.  It 
shows  really  that  when  the  Noble  Lord  and  his  colleagues  talk 
about  Socialism  they  have  not  the  most  elementary  knowledge  of 
what  it  means.  If  he  would  only  look  at  the  dictionary  before  he 
interrupts,  it  would  be  better.   Does  he  really  mean  to  suggest  that 


328  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

peasant  proprietorship  is  Socialism  ?  Four-fifths  of  the  land  of 
Denmark  belongs  to  peasant  proprietors.  That  is  the  very  opposite 
of  Socialism  !  Some  hon.  Members  talk  without  the  slightest  knowl- 
edge of  the  phrases  they  use  —  phrases  which  are  used  wildly  in 
the  streets,  and,  if  I  may  say  so,  ignorantly.  May  I  just  say  to  the 
Noble  Lord  that  in  Denmark  this  has  been  a  substitute  for  Protec- 
tion. The  one  community  in  Denmark  that  would  not  have  pro- 
tection for  its  industry  was  the  farming  community.  They  did  ask 
for  this,  and  it  has  been  a  substitute  for  Protection.  They  asked 
for  agricultural  education,  co-operation,  the  cheapening  and  the 
development  of  the  facilities  for  transport,  aid  in  cattle  and  horse 
breeding,  and  the  Government  aid  in  technical  education.  That  is 
what  they  asked  for.  It  has  been  a  complete  triumph  throughout 
the  whole  of  that  country.  Not  only  that,  but  the  communities 
which  demanded  and  relied  upon  Protection  have  not  flourished. 
They  have  decayed.  The  farming  community  who  preferred  this 
method  of  Free  Trade  prospered  year  after  year,  until  they  have 
become  the  most  prosperous  little  farming  community  in  the  world. 
Denmark  to-day,  a  country  without  any  great  industries  except 
agriculture  —  which  is  Free  Trade  —  a  country  without  any  great 
mineral  resources,  and  a  country  which  not  so  very  long  ago  was 
devastated  by  war,  has  become  the  second  country  in  the  world  so 
far  as  wealth  is  concerned,  owing  entirely  to  its  intelligent  use  of 
Free  Trade  assistance  for  agriculture.  And  this  system  —  [Inter- 
ruption.] Now,  really,  hon.  Members  might  give  me  an  opportunity 
of  just  stating  my  case.  They  have  been  criticising  very  freely, 
and  I  do  not  object,  but  they  must  allow  me  to  answer.  This  is 
the  system  which  has  been  the  making  of  Denmark.  It  has  not 
merely  made  the  country  prosperous,  but  it  has  increased  the 
people's  intelligence  and  made  them  a  stronger  and  a  more  self- 
reliant  race. 

Look  at  the  Report  of  the  Scottish  Commission  which  went  to 
Denmark.  The  one  thing  they  dwelt  upon  was  the  intelligence  and 
self-reliance  which  have  been  promoted  as  a  result  of  this  system 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  329 

which  we  have  embodied  in  this  Bill  —  this  system  which,  accord- 
ing to  the  Noble  Lord  in  the  rather  melodramatic  peroration  with 
which  he  concluded  his  speech,  is  going  to  destroy  the  national 
character  of  this  countiy,  and  depose  us  from  our  pride  of  place 
amongst  the  civilised  Powers  of  the  world !  This  is  the  language 
of  wild,  extravagant  denunciation.  Does  it  really  become  the  No- 
ble Lord  ?  He  has  lost  his  sense  of  proportion  altogether  in  exam- 
ining the  Bill.  But  it  is  all  entirely  due  to  the  fact  that  he  is  criti- 
cising without  the  slightest  knowledge  of  what  has  been  done  in 
other  countries.  I  am  perfectly  certain,  if  he  had  even  spent  an 
half-hour  in  reading  reports,  which  he  could  have  got  from  the 
Library,  of  responsible  Commissioners  that  examined  similar  sys- 
tems in  other  parts  of  the  world,  he  would  never  have  given  to 
this  House  the  speech  that  he  has  given  to  it  to-day.  .  .  . 


Extract  ^^ 

LABOUR  VIEW  OF  THE  DEVELOPMENT  BILL 

{M?'.  G.  A'.  Bar/ies,  Commons^  September  6,  iQog) 

Mr.  Barnes  ^ :  .  .  .  I  believe  that  this  is  the  first  real  attempt 
that  has  been  made  to  deal  with  unemployment  on  the  lines  of 
what  might  be  called  organic  change.  Hitherto,  unemployment  has 
been  dealt  with  by  the  provision  of  relief  works,  and  I  am  afraid 
that  many  of  them  have  been  costly,  uneconomic,  and  wasteful, 
while  some  of  them  may  even  be  said  to  have  been  demoralising. 
This  Bill,  however,  unlike  previous  efforts  to  deal  with  unemploy- 
ment, deals  with  it  not  only  in  its  effect  but  its  cause.  It  aims  at 
preventing  fluctuations  and  organising  industrial  activity  in  such 
a  way  as  to  prevent  those  fluctuations  taking  place.  In  other 
words,  it  does  not  only  propose  to  deal  with  sores  upon  the  sur- 
face, but  it  proposes  to  prevent  new  sores  breaking  out,  and  for 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  10,  col.  984. 


330  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

my  part  I  am  glad  of  that,  because  I  am  sick  and  tired  of  dealing 
with  unemployed  workmen  as  if  they  were  merely  pariahs  and 
outcasts,  or  dealing  with  them  in  a  mollycoddling  sort  of  way  and 
giving  them  grants.  I  am  glad  that  the  time  will  come  when  we 
shall  deal  with  the  unemployed  workmen  with  the  view  of  absorb- 
ing them  into  the  civilised  community  on  terms  of  equality  of 
citizenship.   .   .  . 

Extract  §6 

EXPLANATION  OF  THE   DEVELOPMENT  BILL 

(Earl  Carrington^  President  of  the  Board  of  Agricttltiire  and 
Fis/ieries,  Lords^  October  14,  iQog) 

Earl  Carrington  ^ :  My  Lords,  in  rising  to  move  the  second 
reading  of  the  Development  and  Road  Improvement  Funds  Bill 
perhaps  I  may  be  permitted  to  say  that  this  Bill  marks  another 
step  forward  in  the  land  policy  of  the  Government  outlined  by 
the  late  Sir  H.  Campbell- Bannerman  at  the  Albert  Hall  in  igo6. 
As  regards  agricultural  landlords,  we  consider  that  the  present 
method  of  levying  income  tax  is  not  altogether  fair  to  agricul- 
tural land,  imposed  as  it  was  by  a  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  of 
the  opposite  side  of  politics  to  ourselves  some  sixty  years  ago,  and 
in  which  there  has  been  no  alteration  up  to  the  present  time ;  but 
in  a  few  days  I  hope  that  we  may  be  able  to  submit  to  your  Lord- 
ships some  proposals  for  the  relief  of  agricultural  landlords,  who 
really  have  some  causes  to  complain,  and  also  a  scheme  by  which 
death  duties,  which  are  somewhat  heavy,  may  be  paid  in  land  as 
well  as  in  cash. 

We  have  done  what  we  could  for  the  farmers  of  England  by  the 
Land  Tenure  Bill.  We  have  also  tried  to  help  by  the  Small  Hold- 
ings Act  the  agricultural  labourer  and  the  landless  man,  although 
we  have  not  been  so  fortunate  in  your  Lordships'  House  with  the 
1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  3,  col.  1225  sqq. 


THE   HOUSINC;  AND  LAND   PR(3BLEM  331 

Housing  Bill,  in  piloting  which,  if  I  may  be  permitted  to  say  so, 
my  noble  friend  Lord  Beauchamp  has  appeared  to  so  much  ad- 
vantage. Now  the  Government  are  proposing  to  try  to  follow  the 
example  of  other  nations  by  bringing  in  State  assistance  to  the  de- 
velopment of  our  great  national  industry  by  the  Bill  now  before 
the  House.  Some  time  ago  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  con- 
sulted me  in  regard  to  the  agricultural  interest  and  what  he  said  I 
may,  perhaps,  be  permitted  to  repeat  in  the  words  that  he  himself 
used  in  the  House  of  Commons.  He  said  there  is  a  certain  amount 
of  money  —  not  very  much  —  spent  in  a  spasmodic  way  in  the  de- 
velopment of  national  industry,  on  light  railways,  on  harbours,  and 
indirectly  and  to  a  meagre  extent  for  the  interest  of  agriculture, 
and  he  said  he  proposed  to  gather  all  these  grants  into  one  grant. 
On  the  second  reading  of  the  Budget  my  right  hon.  friend,  ac- 
cording to  Hansard,  vol.  6,  p.  340,  used  some  words  which  I  hope 
your  Lordships  will  allow  me  to  read,  as  they  are  very  important. 
He  said,  "  We  are  proposing  a  grant  for  the  purpose  of  doing 
that  class  of  work  which  is  now  very  largely  done  by  the  great 
landowners  themselves,  and  this  will  come  to  at  least  a  quarter  of 
a  million  a  year,  so  that  we  are  relieving  the  great  landowners  of 
at  least  a  quarter  of  a  million  a  year." 

This  is  received,  I  notice,  with  a  certain  amount  of  amusement  by 
some  noble  Lords  opposite,  and  perhaps  it  may  seem  an  extraor- 
dinary proposal  to  come  from  a  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  who  is 
credited  with  somewhat  Radical  ideas.  He  is  supposed  by  some 
people  to  go  too  far  and  by  others  not  to  go  far  enough.  I  may 
remind  the  House  that  it  has  been  publicly  thrown  in  my  right  hon. 
friend's  teeth  that  he  is  a  solicitor  and  a  Welshman.  I  venture,  my 
Lords,  to  think  that  perhaps  these  two  facts  go  some  long  way  to 
explain  the  practical  sympathy  which  my  right  hon.  friend  has  al- 
ways shown  towards  the  agricultural  interest.  As  a  solicitor  he  has 
had  the  opportunity  of  becoming  acquainted  with  the  real  difficulties 
with  which  agriculturists  large  and  small  have  to  contend,  and  born 
and  bred  among  the  hard-working  farmers  of  North  Wales,  he 


332  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

knows  from  personal  experience  the  passionate  attachment  to  the 
soil  of  those  among  whom  he  has  lived  and  the  courage  and  in- 
dustry which  not  only  Welsh  farmers  but  all  farmers  display  in 
playing  their  part  in  the  social  and  industrial  life  of  the  country. 

Let  me  now  come  at  once  to  the  Development  Bill.  It  is  not  a 
very  long  Bill  and  it  is  not  a  very  complicated  one,  whilst  there  is 
no  previous  legislation  bound  up  with  it.  It  is  composed  of  twenty 
clauses  and  is  divided  into  two  parts.  The  first  six  clauses  relate 
to  development,  and  the  other  clauses  relate  to  road  improvement. 
Let  me,  as  briefly  as  I  can,  run  through  our  proposals  in  Part  L 
The  first  clause  enables  the  Treasury  to  make  advances  by  grants 
or  loans  to  a  Government  department  or  through  a  Government  de- 
partment to  public  authorities,  universities,  colleges,  associations, 
or  companies  not  trading  for  profit.  The  objects  of  the  Bill  are  to 
aid  and  encourage  agriculture,  which  is  put  first,  and  then  the  pro- 
motion of  forestry,  reclamation  and  drainage  of  land,  improvement 
of  rural  transport  —  leaving  roads  to  be  dealt  with  in  the  second 
part  of  the  Bill  —  the  construction  and  improvement  of  inland 
navigation  and  harbours,  and  the  development  and  improvement 
of  fisheries.  It  will  be  seen  from  the  second  clause  that  all  grants 
and  advances  will  be  made  out  of  a  Development  Fund  which  will 
be  fed  in  three  ways  —  first,  by  such  money  as  may  be  voted  by 
Parliament;  secondly,  by  ;^5oo,ooo  charged  on  the  Consolidated 
Fund  for  five  years ;  and,  thirdly,  by  the  interest  on  and  repay- 
ment of  advanced  and  miscellaneous  receipts.  This,  my  Lords, 
will  be  paid  into  the  Development  Fund  instead  of  being  paid  back 
automatically  into  the  Treasury  as  is  generally  the  case. 

.Vs  regards  the  Development  Fund,  I  think  most  of  your  Lord- 
ships will  agree  that  the  proposal  opens  a  very  wide  question  and 
that  it  might  become  a  source  of  great  danger  and  almost  a  national 
danger.  If  there  is  one  thing  which  people  in  public  life  on  both 
sides  of  politics  insist  on,  it  is  the  cautious  administration  of  public 
money.  The  standard  of  public  life  in  this  country  is  very  high, 
and  it  would  be  a  grievous  thing  if  any  Bill  was  brought  in  on 


THE  HOUSIN(;  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  333 

either  side  of  politics  which  would  affect  it.  That  was  at  once 
pointed  out  by  two  Members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  one  on 
each  side,  —  Mr.  Rufus  Isaacs  on  the  Liberal  side  and  Lord  Robert 
Cecil  on  the  Conservative  side,  —  and  they  plainly  showed  the  dan- 
ger of  putting  ^500,000  into  the  absolute  control  and  hands  of  the 
Government  of  the  day,  whatever  that  Government  might  be,  as 
it  might  end  in  a  scramble  for  spoils  and  might  be  an  invitation  to 
almost  everybody  to  press  for  some  share  of  the  grant. 

I  think  those  of  your  Lordships  —  and  here  are  a  great  many  — 
who  have  had  the  pleasure  of  visiting  Australia  will  remember  that 
the  great  difficulty  in  the  old  days  there  was  —  I  do  not  know  if 
it  is  so  now  —  that  Members  of  Parliament  were  known  as  roads 
and  bridges  Members,  and  their  seats  entirely  depended  on  the 
public  works  which  they  could  induce  the  Ministry  of  the  day  to 
commence  and  continue  in  their  constituencies.  Speaking  in  the 
name  of  the  Government,  I  ought  to  express  our  gratitude  to  Lord 
Robert  Cecil  for  the  statesmanlike  way  in  which  he  showed  this 
possible  danger  and  for  the  machinery  which  he  put  forward  to 
avoid  it.  That  machinery  was  at  once  adopted  by  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  and  is  now  part  and  parcel  of  the  Bill. 

To  prevent  any  possible  danger  of  political  pressure  we  propose 
that  the  Treasury  should  appoint  five  Commissioners,  who  must 
be  men  of  independent  mind,  great  capacity,  high  standing,  and 
high  character.  They  will  be  appointed  by  the  Treasury  for  ten 
years,  and  two  of  them  will  be  paid  salaries  which  in  the  aggregate 
will  not  amount  to  more  than  ;;^3ooo  a  year  —  and  which  will  be 
paid  out  of  the  Development  Fund.  We  hope  that  that  money  will 
be  sufficient  to  insure  the  Government  getting  the  very  best  and 
highest  class  of  men  for  the  positions.  Three  are  to  form  a  quorum. 
With  the  consent  of  the  Treasury,  of  course,  they  can  appoint  their 
officers  and  servants  and  give  certain  salaries  that  they  may  think 
fit.  The  Treasury  will  refer  every  application  that  may  be  made 
by  a  Government  department  to  these  Commissioners ;  but  if  the 
applicants  are  any  other  body,  as  mentioned  in  Clause  i  of  the  Bill, 


334  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  Treasury  will  at  once  send  the  application  to  the  Government 
department  which  is  concerned  to  report,  and  then  the  Government 
department  will  refer  the  scheme  to  the  Development  Commis- 
sioners. Then,  of  course,  whether  the  scheme  is  carried  through 
or  not  will  depend  on  whether  it  meets  with  the  sanction  or  refusal 
of  the  Treasury. 

The  Commissioners  —  and  I  hope  your  Lordships  will  consider 
this  right  —  will  consider  and  report  at  once  to  the  Treasury  on 
every  application.  They  may  hold  inquiries  and  appoint  advisory 
committees  who  may  report  to  them,  and  they  can  authorise  ap- 
plicants to  obtain  land  compulsorily,  and  a  single  arbitrator  will 
decide  the  compensation  and  costs  to  be  paid.  I  need  hardly  say 
that  no  ten  per  cent  will  be  given  for  compulsory  purchase  of  land 
so  that  there  should  be  no  difficulty  or  grumbling  about  who  the 
arbitrator  should  be.  The  arbitrator  will  be  appointed  in  England 
by  the  Lord  Chief  Justice,  in  Scotland  by  the  Lord  President  of 
the  Court  of  Session,  and  in  Ireland  by  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  of 
Ireland.  There  is  an  exemption  in  regard  to  compulsory  acquisi- 
tion of  land  in  favour  of  parks,  gardens,  home  farms,  and  places 
of  historic  interest.   .   .   . 

Extract  5/ 

DEVELOPMENT  AND   ROAD    IMPROVEMENT   FUNDS 
ACT,  1909 

{g  Edw.  7,  ch.  47,  in  part) 

An  Act  to  promote  the   Economic   Development  of  the  United 
Kingdom  and  the   Improvement  of  Roads  therein. 

(3rd  December  1909) 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and  Temporal, 
and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 


THE   HOUSING  AND   LAND   PROBLEM  335 

Part  I 

Development 
/.  Payments 

(i)  The  Treasury  may,  upon  the  recommendation  of  the 
Development  Commissioners  appointed  under  this  Act,  make  ad- 
vances to  a  Government  department,  or  through  a  Government 
department  to  a  public  authority,  university,  college,  school,  or 
institution,  or  an  association  of  persons  or  company  not  trading 
for  profit,  either  by  way  of  grant  or  by  v^^ay  of  loan,  or  partly 
in  one  way  and  partly  in  the  other,  and  upon  such  terms  and 
subject  to  such  conditions  as  they  may  think  fit,  for  any  of  the 
following  purposes : 

(a)  Aiding  and  developing  agriculture  and  rural  industries  by 
promoting  scientific  research,  instruction  and  experiments 
in  the  science,  methods  and  practice  of  agriculture  (in- 
cluding the  provision  of  farm-institutes),  the  organisation 
of  co-operation,  instruction  in  marketing  produce,  and 
the  extension  of  the  provision  of  small  holdings ;  and  by 
the  adoption  of  any  other  means  which  appear  calculated 
to  develop  agriculture  and  rural  industries ; 
{U)  Forestry  (including  (i)  the  conducting  of  inquiries,  experi- 
ments, and  research  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  forestry 
and  the  teaching  of  methods  of  afforestation ;  (2)  the 
purchase  and  planting  of  land  found  after  inquiry  to  be 
suitable  for  afforestation) ; 
(r)  The  reclamation  and  drainage  of  land ; 

(('/)  The  general  improvement  of  rural  transport  (including  the 
making  of  light  railways  but  not  including  the  construc- 
tion or  improvement  of  roads)  ; 
(e)  The  construction  and  improvement  of  harbours  ; 
(/)  The  construction  and  improvement  of  inland  navigations ; 
{g)  The  development  and  improvement  of  fisheries ; 


00 


6  BRITISH    SOCIAL   POLITICS 


and  for  any  other  purpose   calculated  to  promote  the  economic 
development  of  the  United   Kingdom. 

(2)  All  applications  for  advances  under  this  Part  of  this  Act 
shall  be  made  to  the  Treasury  in  accordance  with  regulations 
made  by  the  Treasury. 

(3)  No  advance  shall  be  made  for  any  purpose  which  might  be 
carried  out  under  the  provisions  of  the  Small  Holdings  and  Allot- 
ments Act,  1908/  upon  any  terms  or  conditions  different  from 
those  contained  in  that  statute  except  for  some  special  reason 
which  shall  be  stated  in  the  annual  report  of  the  Development 
Commissioners. 

2.   Estahlis]nnciit  of  Development  Fund 

(i)  All  advances,  whether  by  way  of  grant  or  by  way  of  loan, 
made  under  this  Part  of  this  Act  shall  be  made  out  of  a  fund, 
called  the  development  fund,  into  which  shall  be  paid  — 

(a)  Such  moneys  as  may  from  time  to  time  be  provided  by 
Parliament  for  the  purposes  of  this  Part  of  this  Act ; 

{U)  The  sums  issued  out  of  the  Consolidated  Fund  under  this 
section ;  and 

{c)  Any  sums  received  by  the  Treasury  by  way  of  interest  on 
or  repayment  of  any  advance  made  by  way  of  loan  under 
this  Part  of  this  Act,  and  any  profits  or  proceeds  derived 
from  the  expenditure  of  any  advance  which  by  the  terms 
on  which  the  advance  was  made  are  to  be  paid  to  the 
Treasury. 

(2)  There  shall  be  charged  on  and  issued  out  of  the  Consoli- 
dated Fund,  or  the  growing  produce  thereof,  in  the  year  ending 
the  thirty-first  day  of  March  nineteen  hundred  and  eleven,  and  in 
each  of  the  next  succeeding  four  years,  the  sum  of  five  hundred 
thousand  pounds. 

(3)  The  Treasury  may  accept  any  gifts  made  to  them  for  all  or 
any  of  the. purposes  for  which  advances  may  be  made  under  this 

1  S  Edw.  7,  ch.  36. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  337 

Part  of  this  Act  and,  subject  to  the  terms  of  gift,  apply  them  for 
the  purposes  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  in  accordance  with  regulations 
made  by  the  Treasury. 

(4)  The  Treasury  shall  cause  an  account  to  be  prepared  and 
transmitted  to  the  Comptroller  and  Auditor-General  for  examina- 
tion, on  or  before  the  thirtieth  day  of  September  in  every  year, 
showing  the  receipts  into  and  issues  out  of  the  development  fund 
in  the  financial  year  ended  on  the  thirty-first  day  of  March  pre- 
ceding, and  the  Comptroller  and  Auditor-General  shall  certify  and 
report  upon  the  same,  and  such  account  and  report  shall  be  laid 
before  Parliament  by  the  Treasury  on  or  before  the  thirty-first  day 
of  January  in  the  following  year  if  Parliament  be  then  sitting,  and, 
if  not  sitting,  then  within  one  week  after  Parliament  shall  be  next 
assembled. 

(5)  Payments  out  of  and  into  the  development  fund,  and  all 
other  matters  relating  to  the  fund  and  the  moneys  standing  to  the 
credit  of  the  fund,  shall  be  made  and  regulated  in  such  manner  as 
the  Treasury  may  by  minute  to  be  laid  before  Parliament  direct. 

(6)  The  Treasury  may  from  time  to  time  invest  any  moneys 
standing  to  the  credit  of  the  development  fund  in  any  securities  in 
which  trustees  are  by  law  authorised  to  invest  trust  funds. 

J.   Development  Commissioners 

(1)  For  the  purposes  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  it  shall  be  lawful 
for  His  Majesty  by  warrant  under  the  sign  manual  to  appoint  five  ^ 
Commissioners,  to  be  styled  the  Development  Commissioners,  of 
whom  one  to  be  appointed  by  His  Majesty  shall  be  chairman. 

(2)  Subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  section,  the  teiTn  of  office 
of  a  Commissioner  shall  be  ten  years.  One  Commissioner  shall 
retire  every  second  year,-  but  a  retiring  Commissioner  may  be  re- 
appointed. The  order  in  which  the  Commissioners  first  appointed 
are  to  retire  shall  be  determined  by  His  Majesty.    On  a  casual 

1  Eight,  by  amendment  of  1910.    10  Edw.  7,  ch.  7. 

2  After  the  first  two  years,  one  Commissioner  shall  retire  every  year.    Ibid. 


338  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

vacancy  occurring  by  reason  of  the  death,  resignation,  or  inca- 
pacity of  a  Commissioner,  or  otherwise,  the  person  appointed  by 
His  Majesty  to  fill  the  vacancy  shall  continue  in  office  until  the 
Commissioner  in  whose  place  he  was  appointed  would  have  retired, 
and  shall  then  retire. 

(3)  There  shall  be  paid  to  not  more  than  two  of  the  Commis- 
sioners such  salaries,  not  exceeding  in  the  aggregate  three  thousand 
pounds  in  each  year,  as  the  Treasury  may  direct. 

(4)  The  Commissioners  may  act  by  three  ^  of  their  number  and 
notwithstanding  a  vacancy  in  their  number,  and,  subject  to  the 
approval  of  the  Treasury,  may  regulate  their  own  procedure. 

(5)  The  Commissioners  may,  with  the  consent  of  the  Treasury, 
appoint  and  employ  such  officers  and  servants  for  the  purposes  of 
this  Part  of  this  Act  as  they  think  necessary,  and  may  remove  any 
officer  or  servant  so  appointed  and  employed,  and  there  shall  be  paid 
to  such  officers  and  servants  such  salaries  or  remuneration  as  the 
Commissioners,  with  the  consent  of  the  Treasury,  may  determine. 

(6)  The  salaries  of  the  Commissioners  and  the  salaries  or 
remuneration  of  their  officers  and  servants,  and  any  expenses 
incurred  by  the  Commissioners  in  the  execution  of  their  duties 
under  this  Part  of  this  Act,  to  such  amount  as  may  be  sanctioned 
by  the  Treasury,  shall  be  defrayed  out  of  the  development  fund. 

4.   Powers  and  Duties  of  Commissioners 

(i)  Every  application  for  an  advance  under  this  Part  of  this 
Act,  whether  by  way  of  grant  or  by  way  of  loan,  by  any  body 
qualified  to  receive  an  advance  under  this  Part  of  this  Act,  shall, 
if  the  applicant  is  a  Government  department,  be  referred  by  the 
Treasury  to  the  Development  Commissioners,  and,  if  the  appli- 
cant is  any  other  body  or  persons,  shall  be  sent  by  the  Treas- 
ury to  the  Government  department  concerned,  to  be  by  them 
referred  together  with  their  report  thereon  to  the  Development 
Commissioners. 

1  Four.    10  Edw.  7,  ch.  7. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  339 

(2)  The  Commissioners  shall  consider  and  report  to  the  Treas- 
ury on  every  application  so  referred  to  them,  and  may  for  that 
purpose,  if  necessary,  hold  inquiries  either  by  themselves,  or  by 
any  of  their  officers,  or  any  other  person  appointed  for  the  purpose. 

(3)  The  Commissioners  may  also  appoint  advisory  committees, 
and  may  submit  to  any  such  advisory  committee  for  their  advice 
any  application  referred  to  them. 

(4)  The  Commissioners  may  also  frame  schemes  with  respect  to 
any  of  the  matters  for  M^hich  advances  may  be  made  under  this  Part 
of  this  Act  with  a  view  to  their  adoption  by  a  Government  depart- 
ment or  other  body  or  persons  to  whom  an  advance  may  be  made. 

(5)  Before  making  any  recommendation  for  an  advance  for  the 
purpose  of  the  improvement  of  rural  transport,  the  Commissioners 
shall  consult  with  the  Road  Board. 

(6)  The  Commissioners  shall  make  to  the  Treasury  an  annual 
report  of  their  proceedings,  and  such  report  shall  be  laid  annually 
before  Parliament  by  the  Treasury. 

J.  Power  to  acquire  Land 

(i)  Where  an  advance  is  made  under  this  Part  of  this  Act  for 
any  purpose  which  involves  the  acquisition  of  land,  the  depart- 
ment, body,  or  persons  to  whom  the  advance  is  made,  may  acquire 
and  hold  land  for  the  purpose,  and,  where  they  are  unable  to 
acquire  by  agreement  on  reasonable  terms  any  land  which  they 
consider  necessary,  they  may  apply  to  the  Development  Commis- 
sioners for  an  order  empowering  them  to  acquire  the  land  com- 
pulsorily  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Schedule  to  this 
Act,  and  the  Commissioners  shall  have  power  to  make  such  order. 

(2)  No  land  shall  be  authorised  by  an  order  under  this  section 
to  be  acquired  compulsorily  which,  at  the  date  of  the  order,  forms 
part  of  any  park,  garden,  or  pleasure  ground,  or  forms  part  of  the 
home  farm  attached  to  and  usually  occupied  with  a  mansion  house, 
or  is  otherwise  required  for  the  amenity  or  convenience  of  any 
dwelling-house,  or  which  at  that  date  is  the  property  of  any  local 


340  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

authority,  or  has  been  acquired  by  any  corporation  or  company 
for  the  purposes  of  a  railway,  dock,  canal,  water,  or  other  public 
undertaking,  or  is  the  site  of  an  ancient  monument  or  other  object 
of  archaeological  interest. 

(3)  The  Commissioners,  in  making  an  order  for  the  compulsory 
purchase  of  land,  shall  have  regard  to  the  extent  of  land  held  or 
occupied  in  the  locality  by  any  owner  or  tenant  and  to  the  con- 
venience of  other  property  belonging  to  or  occupied  by  the  same 
owner  or  tenant,  and  shall,  so  far  as  practicable,  avoid  taking  an 
undue  or  inconvenient  quantity  of  land  from  any  one  owner  or 
tenant,  and  for  that  purpose  where  part  only  of  a  holding  is  taken 
shall  take  into  consideration  the  size  and  character  of  the  existing 
agricultural  buildings  not  proposed  to  be  taken  which  are  used  in 
connexion  with  the  holding  and  the  quantity  and  nature  of  the 
land  available  for  occupation  therewith,  and  shall  also  so  far  as 
practicable  avoid  displacing  any  considerable  number  of  agricultural 
labourers  or  others  employed  on  or  about  the  land. 

6.   Definition 

For  the  purposes  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  the  expression  "  agri- 
culture and  rural  industries "  includes  agriculture,  horticulture, 
dairying,  the  breeding  of  horses,  cattle,  and  other  live  stock  and 
poultry,  the  cultivation  of  bees,  home  and  cottage  industries,  the 
cultivation  and  preparation  of  flax,  the  cultivation  and  manufac- 
ture of  tobacco,  and  any  industries  immediately  connected  with 
and  subservient  to  any  of  the  said  matters. 

Part  II 

Road  Improvement 

7.   Constitution  of  Road  Board 

(i)  For  the  purposes  of  improving  the  facilities  for  road  traffic 
in  the  United  Kingdom  and  of  the  administration  of  the  road  im- 
provement grant  provided  under  any  Act  passed  in  the  present 


THE  HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  341 

or  any  future  session  of  Parliament,  there  shall  be  constituted 
in  accordance  with  regulations  made  by  the  Treasury  a  board,  to 
be  called  the  Road  Board,  consisting  of  such  number  of  persons 
appointed  by  the  Treasury  as  the  Treasury  may  determine. 

(2)  The  Road  Board  shall  be  a  body  corporate  with  a  common 
seal,  with  power  to  hold  land  without  licence  in  mortmain. 

(3)  The  Road  Board  may  pay  the  chairman  or  vice-chairman 
of  the  Board  such  salary  as  the  Board,  with  the  consent  of  the 
Treasury,  may  determine. 

(4)  The  Road  Board  may  appoint  such  officers  and  servants  for 
the  purposes  of  their  powers  and  duties  under  this  Part  of  this 
Act  as  the  Board  may,  with  the  sanction  of  the  Treasury,  deter- 
mine, and  there  shall  be  paid  to  such  officers  and  servants  out  of 
the  road  improvement  grant  such  salaries  or  remuneration  as  the 
Treasury  may  determine. 

8.   Powers  of  Road  Board 

(i)  The  Road  Board  shall  have  power,  with  the  approval  of 
the  Treasury  — 

{ci)  to  make  advances  to  county  councils  and  other  highway 
authorities  in  respect  of  the  construction  of  new  roads 
or  the  improvement  of  existing  roads ; 
{F)  to  construct  and  maintain  any  new  roads ; 
which   appear  to   the   Board  to  be  required  for  facilitating  road 
traffic. 

(2)  Where  advances  have  been  made  to  highway  authorities  in 
respect  of  the  construction  of  new  roads,  the  Road  Board  may, 
where  they  think  it  desirable,  also  contribute  towards  the  cost  of 
maintenance  of  such  new  roads. 

(3)  The  sums  expended  by  the  Road  Board  out  of  income  on 
the  construction  of  new  roads  or  the  acquisition  of  land,  or  in 
respect  of  any  loan  raised  for  any  such  purpose,  shall  not  in  any 
year  exceed  one-third  of  the  estimated  receipts  of  the  Road  Board 
for  that  year. 


342  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(4)  An  advance  to  a  highway  authority  may  be  either  by  way 
of  grant  or  by  way  of  loan,  or  partly  in  one  way  and  partly  in  the 
other,  and  shall  be  upon  such  terms  and  subject  to  such  conditions 
as  the  Board  think  fit. 

(5)  For  the  purposes  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  the  expression 
"  improvement  of  roads  "  includes  the  widening  of  any  road,  the 
cutting  off  the  corners  of  any  road  where  land  is  required  to  be 
purchased  for  that  purpose,  the  levelling  of  roads,  the  treatment 
of  a  road  for  mitigating  the  nuisance  of  dust,  and  the  doing  of  any 
other  work  in  respect  of  roads  beyond  ordinary  repairs  essential 
to  placing  a  road  in  a  proper  state  of  repair ;  and  the  expression 
"  roads  "  includes  bridges,  viaducts,  and  subways. 

g.   Roads  constnided  by  Road  Board 

(1)  Every  road  constructed  by  the  Road  Board  under  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Part  of  this  Act  shall  be  a  public  highway,  and  the 
enactments  relating  to  highways  and  bridges  shall  apply  to  such 
roads  accordingly,  except  that  every  such  road  shall  be  maintain- 
able by  and  at  the  cost  of  the  Road  Board,  and,  for  the  purpose 
of  the  maintenance,  repair,  improvement,  and  enlargement  of  or 
dealing  with  any  such  road,  the  Board  shall  have  the  same  powers 
(except  the  power  of  levying  a  rate)  and  be  subject  to  the  same 
duties  as  a  county  council  have  and  are  subject  to  as  respects 
main  roads,  and  may  further  exercise  any  powers  vested  in  a 
county  council  for  the  purposes  of  the  maintenance  and  repair 
of  bridges,  and  the  Road  Board  shall  have  the  same  powers  as  a 
county  council  for  the  preventing  and  removing  of  obstructions : 
Provided  that  — 

{a)  Communications  between  a  road  or  path  and  a  road  con- 
structed by  the  Road  Board  shall  be  made  in  manner 
to  be  approved  by  the  Road  Board ;  and 
iU)  The  Road  Board  and  any  highway  authority  in  whose 
district  any  part  of  any  such  road  is  situate  may  con- 
tract  for   the   undertaking   by   such   authority   of  the 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND   PROBLEM  343 

maintenance  and  repair  of  the  part  of  such  road  in 
their  district ;   and,   for  the   purposes  of  such  under- 
taking,  the    highway   authority   shall  have    the    same 
powers  and  be  subject  to  the  same  duties  and  liabili- 
ties as  if  the  road  were  a  road  vested  in  the  highway 
authority. 
(2)  Before  the  Treasury  approve  of  the  construction  of  a  new 
road  by  the  Road  Board,  they  shall  consult  with  the  Local  Gov- 
ernment Board  and  shall  satisfy  themselves  that  notice  of  the 
intention  to  construct  the  road  has  been  sent  by  the  Road  Board 
to  every  highway  authority  in  the  area  of  which  any  part  of  the 
proposed  road  will  be  situate,  and  shall  consider  any  objections 
to   the   proposed   road   which   they   may   receive  from   any   such 
authority. 

10.    Cotistrnction  of  New  Roads  by  Highway  Authorities 

(i)  Where  the  Road  Board  make  an  advance  to  a  highway 
authority  in  respect  of  the  construction  of  a  new  road,  the  Board 
may  authorise  the  authority  to  construct  the  road,  and  where  so 
authorised  the  highway  authority  shall  have  power  to  construct 
the  road  and  to  do  all  such  acts  as  may  be  necessary  for  the  pur- 
pose, and  any  expenses  of  the  authority,  so  far  as  not  defrayed 
out  of  the  advance,  shall  be  defrayed  as  expenses  incurred  by  the 
authority  in  exercise  of  their  powers  as  highway  authority,  and  the 
enactments  relating  to  such  expenses,  including  the  provisions  as 
to  borrowing,  shall  apply  accordingly. 

(2)  Where  the  highway  authority  to  whom  the  advance  is  made 
are  a  county  council,  the  new  road,  when  constructed,  shall  be  a 
main  road  and  in  any  other  case  shall  be  a  highway  repairable  by 
the  inhabitants  at  large  : 

Provided  that  the  maintenance  of  any  such  road  within  the 
administrative  county  of  London  shall  devolve  upon  the  local 
authority  responsible  for  the  maintenance  of  streets  and  roads 
in  whose  district  the  same  is  situate. 


344  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

II.   Acquisition  of  Land 

(i)  Where  the  Treasur)'  have  approved  a  proposal  by  the  Road 
Board  to  construct  a  new  road  under  this  Part  of  this  Act  the 
Board  may  acquire  land  for  the  purpose,  and  may,  in  addition, 
acquire  land  on  either  side  of  the  proposed  road  within  two  hun- 
dred and  twenty  yards  from  the  middle  of  the  proposed  road. 

(2)  The  Road  Board  may  acquire,  erect,  and  furnish  such  offices 
and  other  buildings  as  they  may  require,  and  may  acquire  land  for 
the  purpose. 

(3)  Where  a  highway  authority  are  authorised  to  construct  a 
new  road  under  this  Part  of  this  Act,  or  an  advance  is  made  to 
such  an  authority  in  respect  of  the  improvement  of  an  existing 
road,  the  authority  may  acquire  land  for  the  purpose  of  such 
construction  or  improvement. 

(4)  For  the  purpose  of  the  purchase  of  land  by  agreement  under 
this  Part  of  this  Act  by  the  Road  Board  or  a  highway  authority  the 
Lands  Clauses  Acts  shall  be  incorporated  with  this  Part  of  this  Act, 
except  the  provisions  of  those  Acts  with  respect  to  the  purchase  and 
taking  of  land  otherwise  than  by  agreement,  and  section  one  hundred 
and  seventy-eight  of  the  Public  Health  Act,  1875,  shall  apply  as  if 
the  Road  Board  and  the  highway  authority  were  referred  to  therein. 

(5)  Where  the  Road  Board  or  any  highway  authority  are  unable 
to  acquire  by  agreement  on  reasonable  terms  any  land  which  they 
consider  necessary,  they  may  apply  to  the  Development  Commis- 
sioners for  an  order  empowering  them  to  acquire  the  land  com- 
pulsorily  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Schedule  to  this 
Act,  and  the  Commissioners  shall  have  power  to  make  such  an 
order :  Provided  that  the  provisions  of  Part  I  of  this  Act,  pro- 
hibiting the  compulsory  acquisition  of  the  classes  of  land  men- 
tioned in  subsection  (3)  ^  of  section  five  of  this  Act  shall  apply 
to  the  acquisition  by  the  Road  Board  of  land  on  either  side  of 
a  road  proposed  to  be  constructed  by  the  Board. 

1  Subsection  (2)  is  meant.   The  mistake  was  corrected  by  10  Edvv.  7,  ch.  7. 


THE   HOUSING  AND  LAND  PROBLEM  345 

(6)  The  Road  Board  shall  have  full  power,  with  the  approval 
of  the  Treasury,  to  sell,  lease,  and  manage  any  land  acquired  by 
them  under  this  Part  of  this  Act  and  not  required  for  the  new 
road,  and  any  receipts  derived  from  any  such  land,  so  far  as  they 
are  applied  for  the  purposes  of  the  construction  of  new  roads, 
shall  not  be  treated  as  part  of  the  expenditure  of  the  Road  Board 
on  new  roads  for  the  purpose  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  limiting 
the  amount  of  expenditure  of  the  Road  Board  on  new  roads. 

12.  Expenses  and  Receipts  of  Road  Board 

(i)  All  expenses  of  the  Road  Board  under  this  Part  of  this 
Act,  including  the  salary  of  the  chairman  or  vice-chairman  and 
the  salaries  and  the  remuneration  of  officers  and  servants,  to  such 
amount  as  may  be  sanctioned  by  the  Treasury,  shall  be  defrayed 
out  of  the  road  improvement  grant. 

(2)  The  Treasury  shall  cause  an  account  to  be  prepared  and 
transmitted  to  the  Comptroller  and  Auditor-General  for  exami- 
nation, showing  the  receipts  into  and  issues  out  of  the  road  im- 
provement grant  in  the  financial  year  ending  the  thirty-first  day 
of  March  preceding,  and  the  Comptroller  and  Auditor-General 
shall  certify  and  report  upon  the  same,  and  such  account  and 
report  shall  be  laid  before  Parliament  by  the  Treasury. 

(3)  Any  sums  received  by  the  Road  Board  under  this  Part  of 
this  Act  shall,  subject  to  regulations  made  by  the  Treasury,  be 
carried  to  the  account  to  which  the  road  improvement  grant  is 
required  to  be  carried  under  the  Act  under  which  the  grant  is 
provided,  and  shall  be  treated  as  part  of  that  grant. 

I  J.   Power  to  borrow 

(i)  The  Road  Board  may,  with  the  approval  of  and  subject  to 
regulations  made  by  the  Treasury,  borrow  on  the  security  of  the 
road  improvement  grant  for  the  purpose  of  meeting  any  expendi- 
ture which  appears  to  the  Treasury  to  be  of  such  a  nature  that 


346  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

it  ought  to  be  spread  over  a  term  of  years,  so  however  that  the 
total  amount  required  for  the  payment  of  interest  on  and  the  re- 
payment of  money  so  borrowed  shall  not  exceed  in  any  year  the 
sum  of  two  hundred  thousand  pounds. 

(2)  If  and  so  far  as  the  road  improvement  grant  is  insufficient 
to  meet  the  amount  required  for  the  payment  of  interest  on  and 
the  repayment  of  principal  in  any  year,  that  amount  shall  be 
charged  on  and  payable  out  of  the  Consolidated  Fund  or  the 
growing  produce  thereof,  but  any  sums  so  paid  out  of  the  Con- 
solidated Fund  shall  be  made  good  out  of  the  road  improvement 
grant. 

14.  Annual  Report  to  Parliament 

The  Road  Board  shall  make  to  the  Treasury  an  annual  report 
of  their  proceedings,  and  such  report  shall  be  laid  annually  before 
Parliament  by  the  Treasury. 

[Clauses  15-20,  and  an  accompanying  Schedule,  deal  with  ad- 
ministrative details,  definitions,  and  certain  exceptions  having  force 
in  London,  Scotland,  and  Ireland.] 


CHAPTER   VIII 

THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET 

[To  make  proper  provision  for  old  age  pensions  and  general 
elementary  education  and  labour  exchanges  and  town  planning  and 
rural  development,  to  say  nothing  of  the  new  machinery  set  up 
by  the  whole  series  of  social  measures  enacted  since  1905,  placed 
an  additional  strain  upon  a  treasury  already  burdened  with  what 
seemed  to  most  Englishmen  an  absolutely  necessary,  albeit  a  huge, 
expenditure  for  naval  construction  and  maintenance.  The  Liberal 
Government,  frequently  accused  of  anti-imperialistic  leanings  and 
of  a  "  Little  England  "  policy,  could  not  see  its  way  clear  to  lessen- 
ing military  expenditure,  and  yet  had  pronounced  in  favour  of  a 
far-reaching  system  of  national  insurance  ^  as  soon  as  the  requisite 
funds  should  be  forthcoming. 

But  whence  would  the  requisite  funds  come  ?  The  tariff  reformers 
among  the  Unionists,  who  had  been  ably  led  by  Mr.  Joseph  Cham- 
berlain, had  supported  an  increased  militarism  and  an  extended 
colonialism  and  had  advocated  social  reform,  and  had  promised  to 
pay  for  these  things  by  means  of  the  large  revenues  that  would  be 
derived  from  a  high  protective  tariff.  The  failure  of  Mr.  Chamber- 
lain's followers  was  due  in  large  part  to  their  inability  to  convince 
their  fellow-Conservatives  that  a  revolution  in  fiscal  affairs  would 
be  desirable.  And  now  the  Liberal  Government  were  committed 
to  a  policy  of  social  transformation  even  more  definitely  than  Mr. 
Chamberlain,  while  at  the  same  time  they  were  far  more  unitedly 
and  certainly  opposed  to  a  protective  tariff  than  Mr.  Chamberlain's 
Conservative  opponents  had  been.  The  Liberal  Government  could 

1  Cf.  supra,  pp.  45  sqq.,  199  sqq.,  and  infra,  ch.  x. 


348  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

not  add  to  the  financial  burdens  of  the  state  at  the  price  of  aban- 
doning their  traditional  free-trade  principles.  Yet  they  would  add 
to  those  financial  burdens. 

It  was  at  this  point  that  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  as  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  came  forward  with  proposals  for  a  radical  application 
of  direct  taxation  —  graduated  income  tax,  super-tax,  tax  on  the 
unearned  increment,  and  tax  on  undeveloped  property  —  and  for  a 
readjustment  of  the  indirect  taxes,  such  as  licensing  duties,  with  a 
view  to  equalising  the  financial  burdens  among  the  various  classes 
in  the  community.  The  land  taxes,  intended  at  once  as  an  attack 
upon  the  nobles'  monopoly  of  land  and  as  a  means  of  placing  addi- 
tional funds  at  the  disposal  of  the  government  for  purposes  of  social 
amelioration,  would  be  metaphorically  the  stone  for  the  killing  of 
two  birds  at  once.  It  would  be  the  Liberal,  Radical,  and  Labour 
way  out  of  the  dilemma  of  increasing  expenditures  and  maintain- 
ing Great  Britain's  position  as  a  free-trade  country.  The  enemies 
of  Mr.  Lloyd  George  suggested  that  it  was  likewise  Socialistic. 

On  April  29,  1909,  Mr.  Lloyd  George  delivered  his  momentous 
Budget  Speech,  which,  on  account  of  its  clear  presentment  of  the 
principles  underlying  the  new  proposals,  its  concise  statement  of 
the  major  details,  and  the  obvious  connection  between  its  finances 
and  subsequent  projects  for  social  legislation,  is  given  below,  in 
part,  as  Extract  ^8. 

It  took  the  Press  and  the  public  some  time  to  comprehend  the 
details  of  the  new  Budget,  but  it  was  eulogised  by  Liberals  as 
"  democratic  "  and  as  a  triumph  of  free-trade  finance,  while  it  was 
at  once  attacked  by  LTnionist  organs  as  Socialistic,  as  "  an  elec- 
tioneering prospectus,"  as  taxing  the  rich  for  the  benefit  of  the 
poor,  and  as  tending  to  diminish  and  drive  away  capital  and  there- 
fore to  create  more  unemployment  than  it  was  likely  to  relieve. 
Several  special  classes  assailed  it :  the  financial  interests  in  Lon- 
don were  decidedly  adverse ;  the  views  of  the  real  estate  market 
were  very  unfavourable  ;  the  landlords  were  decidedly  opposed  ;  the 
tobacco  trade  and  the  motor  industry  resented  their  new  burdens ; 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         349 

the  brewers  and  distillers  were  loud  in  their  condemnation  ;  Irish 
feeling  was  hostile  to  the  licensing  provisions  of  the  Budget. 

The  general  principles  of  the  Budget  were  debated  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  May  3-5  ;  but  in  view  of  the  vast  length  of  the 
later  discussions,  it  would  be  unnecessary,  were  it  practicable,  to 
give  a  full  abstract  of  the  proceedings.  Some  idea  of  the  progress 
of  the  debate  and  of  the  arguments  advanced  pro  and  con  may  be 
gathered  from  the  "Annual  Register."  ^ 

Mr.  Arthur  J.  Balfour  led  the  Opposition  attack  with  a  speech 
which  passed  over  many  features  of  the  Ministerial  proposals ;  its 
main  points  were  an  objection  to  the  abolition  of  the  old  Sinking 
Fund,  a  criticism  of  the  property  taxes  as  likely  to  encourage 
evasion  and  the  sending  of  capital  abroad,  and  of  the  taxation  of 
undeveloped  land  as  likely  to  injure  market  gardening,  an  argument 
that  unearned  increment  arose  with  other  forms  of  property  besides 
land,  and  an  emphatic  denunciation  of  the  proposed  taxation  of 
the  liquor  trade  as  vindictive.  The  Budget  proposals,  he  declared, 
had  given  a  severe  shock  to  confidence  and  credit.  He  was  answered 
by  the  Postmaster-General,  and  then  Mr.  John  Redmond,  the  Irish 
leader,  declared  that  the  fiudget  was  admirable  and  courageous 
from  the  British  point  of  view,  but,  looking  at  it  from  an  exclu- 
sively Irish  standpoint,  the  whisky  tax  wQuld  more  than  counter- 
balance the  advantage  to  Ireland  of  old  age  pensions,  and  the  tax 
on  tobacco  was  cruel.  What  had  Ireland  to  do  with  Dreadnoughts  ? 
He  condemned,  amongst  other  items,  the  increased  stamp  duties 
on  land  transfers  ;  but  would  gladly  see  issue  taken  with  the  Lords 
on  the  proposed  social  reforms  which  the  Nationalists  approved. 
Mr.  G.  N.  Barnes,  with  some  reserves  as  to  details,  welcomed  the 
Budget  on  behalf  of  the  Labour  party,  and  subsequently  Mr.  Winston 
Churchill  defended  the  Government  programme,  declaring  inciden- 
tally that  the  Opposition  were  debarred  from  criticism  by  their  con- 
stant questions  tending  to  indefinite  expenditure  on  national  defence 
and  their  attempts  to  expand  the  old  age  pension  scheme.    The 

1  Annual  Register,  1909,  pp.  101  sqq. 


350  BRITISH   SOCIAL   POLITICS 

Budget  was  a  vindication  of  free-trade  finance.  He  was  followed 
by  Mr.  Pretyman,  who  was  answered  by  the  Attorney-General ; 
and,  after  other  speeches,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  made 
an  effective  and  temperate  defence  of  his  plans.  Mr.  Balfour,  he 
said,  had  left  three-fourths  of  the  Budget  uncriticised ;  Ireland  was 
asked  in  this  Budget  for  considerably  less  than  her  normal  con- 
tribution to  taxation,  and  should  remember  her  share  in  old  age 
pensions.  The  Development  Grant  would  benefit  landlords  by  giv- 
ing light  railways,  and  next  year  there  might  be  a  relief  of  local 
rates.  German  Conservatives  and  Protectionists  favoured  a  tax 
on  unearned  increment,  which  had  existed  for  years  as  a  local  tax 
in  German  towns,  and  the  Housing  of  the  Working  Classes  Com- 
mission had  recommended  a  tax  on  undeveloped  land  near  towns. 
He  assured  the  House  that  the  Government  was  anxious  to  do 
what  was  right  and  fair.  Mr.  Chaplin  assailed  the  Budget  as  the 
first  step  in  the  Socialist  war  against  property  ;  Mr.  Philip  Snowden, 
an  avowed  Socialist,  declared  that  he  desired  to  make  the  rich 
poorer  in  order  to  make  the  poor  richer ;  the  Budget  was  the 
beginning  of  democratic  government ;  to  take  only  20  per  cent 
was  "  compounding  a  felony."  Mr.  Asquith  remarked  that  both 
parties  had  taken  common  ground  on  old  age  pensions  and  the 
navy  scheme.  The  indirect  taxes  imposed  compared  favourably 
with  the  taxes  on  coal,  sugar,  and  tea,  and  he  defended  the  income 
tax  proposals,  noting  especially  that  not  a  word  had  been  said 
against  the  super-tax.  The  tax  on  unearned  increment,  due  to  social 
causes,  dealt  with  a  normal  and  progressive  increase,  would  only  be 
paid  when  the  value  was  realised,  and  might  relieve  congestion  in 
such  places  as  Glasgow,  where  120,000  people  were  living  in  one-, 
room  tenements.  In  regard  to  estate  duties,  they  would  listen  with 
an  open  mind  to  criticism  of  the  scale.  As  to  the  liquor  duties,  the 
brewers  would  make  good  any  losses  at  the  consumers'  expense. 
Whither  was  capital  to  fly .'  Wherever  it  went  it  would  be  con- 
fronted by  a  Finance  Minister  not  less  necessitous  than  the  Chan- 
cellor of  the  Exchequer.    The  Opposition  had  shown  restiveness 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         351 

when  asked  for  their  alternative  plan,  but  they  might  fairly  be 
asked  to  give  some  general  indication  of  it.  In  1903  there  was 
an  alternative  adumbrated  —  taxes  on  meat,  corn,  and  dairy  prod- 
uce. The  Morning  Post  had  just  suggested  a  "better  way"  — 
import  duties  on  all  foreign  articles  except  raw  materials.  If  that 
was  the  Opposition  proposal,  the  Government  would  be  happy  to 
meet  them.  Meantime,  they  recommended  the  Budget  for  accept- 
ance as  providing  adequately  for  prospective  as  well  as  present 
needs,  without  deviation  from  free  trade.  Mr.  Austen  Chamber- 
lain replied  that  silence  as  to  details  did  not  imply  approval,  that  the 
Budget  was  cutting  down  the  resources  for  war.  The  taxation  was 
not  for  revenue  only,  and  was  not  apportioned  according  to  ability 
to  pay.  The  liquor  taxes  were  clapped  on  a  declining  trade.  The 
death  duties  would  eat  into  the  capital  available  for  the  develop- 
ment of  the  country.  He  severely  criticised  the  super-tax  in  its 
relation  to  other  taxes ;  the  increased  stamp  duties  on  land  trans- 
fers ;  the  proposal  to  tax  reversions  —  which  were  part  of  the  con- 
sideration for  the  lease  ;  the  tax  on  unearned  increment  —  since  it 
was  difficult  to  distinguish  between  "  earned  "  and  ''  unearned  "  ; 
the  tax  on  undeveloped  land,  as  promoting  speculative  building 
and  destroying  recreation  grounds ;  and  in  conclusion,  wondered 
why  the  Government  kept  up  the  farce  of  quarrelling  with  their 
Socialist  allies.  Mr.  Masterman  wound  up  for  the  Government, 
remarking  on  the  absurdity  of  identifying  Socialism  with  the  views 
of  Mr.  Henry  George.    The  debate  was  closured  by  308  to  201. 

On  May  15,  1909,  a  letter  to  the  Prime  Minister  was  published, 
signed  by  leading  London  financial  firms  or  their  representatives, 
including  Messrs.  Rothschilds,  Barings,  Antony  Gibbs  &:  Sons, 
J.  S.  Morgan  &  Co.,  Huth  &  Co.,  C.  J.  Hambro  &  Sons,  Brown, 
Shipley  &  Co.,  Fruehling  &:  Goschen,  Lord  Avebury,  Sir  Felix 
Schuster,  Sir  Thomas  Sutherland,  and  others.  While  declaring 
that  they  were  prepared  to  bear  their  full  share  of  increased  taxa- 
tion, which  they  recognised  as  necessary,  they  expressed  alarm  at 
the  increasing  disproportion  of  the  burden  placed  on  a  small  class. 


352  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

They  held  that  the  increase  of  the  death  duties  (which,  they  stated, 
were  usually  paid  out  of  capital)  and  of  the  income  tax,  coupled 
with  the  super-tax,  would  injure  commerce  and  industry ;  that  the 
prosperity  of  all  classes  had  been  greatly  due  to  the  indisputable 
safety  for  capital  afforded  by  Great  Britain,  and  that  the  taxes  in 
question  would  discourage  private  enterprise  and  thrift,  thus  event- 
ually diminishing  employment  and  reducing  wages. 

All  these  arguments  and  many  more  were  advanced  against  the 
Finance  Bill,  embodying  the  provisions  of  the  Budget,  during  the 
four  days'  debate  which  preceded  its  second  reading  in  the  Com- 
mons on  June  ii.  An  amendment,  moved  by  Mr.  Austen  Cham- 
berlain, involving  its  rejection,  was  negatived  by  366  to  209. 
Sixty-two  Nationalists  voted  in  the  minority. 

Outside  Parliament  the  storm  against  the  Bill  had  meanwhile 
been  gathering  strength.  The  Earl  of  Rosebery  publicly  described^ 
the  Budget  as  a  social  and  political  revolution  to  be  effected  with- 
out the  participation  of  the  people ;  the  country,  he  added,  must 
begin  to  see  that  there  were  vast  flaws  in  the  Constitution.  The 
Ti?ncs  added  a  charge  —  often  repeated  afterwards  —  that  the 
Budget,  coupled  with  the  Town  Planning  Bill,^  was  subjecting 
Great  Britain  to  bureaucratic  rule.  But  the  most  influential  protest 
was  made  by  a  crowded  meeting  of  business  men,  held  at  the 
Cannon  Street  Hotel  on  June  23.  It  was  described  by  Lord  Ave- 
bury  as  not  political,  but  financial  and  economic. 

On  the  same  day  a  "  Budget  League  "  was  formed  by  the  Liberal 
members  of  the  House  of  Commons  to  conduct  a  vigorous  cam- 
paign in  its  favour  in  the  constituencies,  at  a  meeting  held  at  the 
House  of  Commons.  Mr.  Haldane  presided,  Mr.  Winston  Churchill 
spoke,  and  it  was  made  clear  that  no  pressure  would  be  put  on  any 
Liberal  opponents  of  parts  of  the  Budget.  At  the  same  time,  it  was 
clearly  pointed  out  that  the  House  of  Lords  would  probably  veto 
the  Finance  Bill,  and  that  the  question  of  the  Budget  would  there- 
fore be  inextricably  bound  up  with  the  question  of  the  Lords'  veto. 

1  The  London  Times,  June  22,  1909.  2  Q;f.  supra,  ch,  vii. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         353 

As  one  member  expressed  it,  the  inevitably  approaching  election 
would  raise  the  question  of  the  Lords,  the  land,  and  liquor. 

By  midsummer,  the  true  import  of  the  Government's  proposals 
was  quite  thoroughly  understood ;  and  agitation  was  prevalent 
throughout  the  country.  On  July  25,  a  great  Budget  demonstra- 
tion took  place  in  Hyde  Park,  London ;  a  procession  marched 
thither  from  the  Embankment,  and  speeches  were  delivered  from 
twelve  platforms.  That  of  the  Labour  party  attracted  the  largest 
crowd,  and  the  resolution  passed  at  the  other  eleven  was  passed 
here  in  a  more  strongly  worded  version.  Opinions  differed  as  to 
the  significance  of  the  proceedings ;  the  Conservative  Times  said 
that  they  were  "  skilfully  engineered  "  ;  the  Liberal  Westminster 
Gazette  that  an  unusually  large  proportion  of  the  audience  was 
acutely  interested ;  according  to  some  estimates,  the  numbers 
reached  250,000.  Much  had  been  said  of  the  injury  done  to  build- 
ing by  the  Budget ;  yet  the  building  trades'  federation  was  spe- 
cially conspicuous  in  the  Park. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George's  chief  defence  of  his  Budget  before  a  pop- 
ular audience  was  made  at  the  Edinburgh  Castle,  Limehouse,  on 
July  30,  before  an  audience  of  4000.  The  financial  interests,  he 
said,  had  demanded  further  expenditure  on  the  navy ;  but  while 
the  workmen  in  Derbyshire,  Cleveland  and  Dumfries  had  shown 
themselves  willing  to  pay,  there  was  a  howl  from  Belgravia.  The 
rich  said  they  objected  mainly  to  paying  for  old  age  pensions ;  why 
then  had  they  promised  them }  It  now  appeared  they  had  meant 
workmen  to  pay  for  their  own  pensions.  The  Budget  was  raising 
money  to  provide  against  poverty,  unemployment,  and  sickness ; 
for  widows  and  orphans,  and  for  the  development  of  our  own  land. 
The  land  taxes,  especially,  were  being  attacked  with  ferocity.  But 
land  near  the  London  'docks,  formerly  rented  at  £2  or  ^3  an  acre, 
had  sold  at  ^^6000  or  ^8000  an  acre.  A  piece  of  land  at  Golder's 
Green,  near  Hampstead,  had  risen  in  value  from  £\(iO  to  ^2100 
through  the  making  of  the  tube  railway.  The  Duke  of  Northum- 
berland had  asked  ^900  an  acre  for  a  piece  of  land  wanted  for 


354  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

a  school  and  rented  at  30s.  an  acre.  A  bit  of  land  in  Scotland 
wanted  for  a  torpedo  range  —  and  affording  "an  opportunity  for 
patriotism  "  —  was  rated  at  £1 1  2s.  a  year  and  sold  to  the  nation 
for  ^27,225.  After  denouncing  as  "insolence"  a  comparison 
made  in  the  debates  of  the  landlord's  increment  with  that  of  a 
doctor  in  a  growing  town,  he  gave  the  case  of  Mr.  Gorringe,  whose 
lease  (in  Buckingham  Palace  Road)  had  been  renewed  by  the  Duke 
of  Westminster,  the  terms  being  the  increase  of  the  ground  rent 
to  ^4000  a  year,  a  fine  ("  a  fine,  mind  you  '')  of  ^50,000,  and  the 
building  of  huge  and  costly  premises  according  to  plans  submitted 
to  the  Duke.  Such  a  case  "  is  not  business,  it  is  blackmail."  He 
denounced  at  some  length  the  owners  of  mining  royalties  who  would 
not  "  spare  a  copper  "  for  the  miners'  pensions,  and  declared  that 
landowning  was  a  stewardship ;  if  landlords  ceased  to  discharge  their 
traditional  duties,  the  conditions  of  landholding  must  be  reconsid- 
ered. The  landlords  said  they  were  anxious  for  the  small  holders, 
but  they  had  condemned  their  exemption.  As  one  of  the  children 
of  the  people,  he  had  made  up  his  mind  in  framing  the  Budget  that 
no  cupboard  should  be  bared,  no  lot  should  be  harder  to  bear. 

This  speech  was  reprinted  and  widely  circulated ;  but  its  refer- 
ence to  the  "  Gorringe  case  "  was  severely  criticised,  and  what  was 
referred  to  as  its  demagogic  tone  gave  widespread  offence.  Sir 
Edward  Carson  declared  in  the  Times  that  it  marked  "  the  be- 
ginning of  the  end  of  the  rights  of  property";  the  Times  said  that 
Mr.  Lloyd  George  and  Mr.  Churchill  were  trying  to  form  a  new 
party.  Mr.  Lloyd  George's  closing  phrases  provoked  the  rejoinder 
that  many  "  cupboards  would  be  bared  "  by  the  reduction  of  em- 
ployment on  the  part  of  the  great  landowners,  and  the  Duke  of 
Portland  and  others  laid  stress  on  this  point.  This,  however,  served 
only  to  bring  the  landlords  into  greater  disfavour. 

Lord  Lansdowne,  the  leader  of  the  Conservatives  in  the  Upper 
House,  denounced  the  Budget  in  a  public  speech  on  August  9 
as  a  hotch-potch  of  proposals  involving  a  taxation  of  capital  un- 
precedented in  England,  and  compared  Mr.  Lloyd  George  to  the 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         355 

"  robber-gull "  which  lives  by  stealing  fish  from  other  gulls,  and 
intimated  that  the  House  of  Lords  would  refer  the  Finance  Bill 
to  the  people. 

Mr.  Winston  Churchill,  on  the  other  hand,  speaking  at  a  Budget 
League  demonstration  at  Leicester  on  September  4,  made  fun  of 
the  Dukes'  opposition  to  the  Budget  and  laid  stress  on  the  urgency 
of  social  reform.  On  the  one  side  was  the  gap  between  rich  and 
poor,  the  divorce  of  the  people  from  the  land,  the  lack  of  discipline 
and  training  for  the  young,  boy  labour,  physical  degeneration,  the 
"  jumble  of  an  obsolete  poor  law,"  the  liquor  traffic,  unemployment, 
the  absence  of  a  minimum  standard  of  life  among  the  workers, 
and  the  increase  of  vulgar,  joyless  luxury;  on  the  other,  the  "moral, 
spiritual,  civic,  scientific  forces  "  which  the  Budget  would  reinforce. 
The  tax-gatherer  would  now  ask,  not,  what  have  you  got,  but  how 
did  you  get  it  1  ^  The  differentiation  in  treatment  of  wealth  implied 
a  constant  relation  between  acquired  wealth  and  service  previously 
rendered.  Where  no  service  had  been  done,  but  rather  disservice, 
the  State  should  make  a  difference  in  taxation.  He  welcomed  the 
struggle  as  likely  to  "  smash  "  the  Lords'  veto. 

Quite  as  illuminating  as  the  popular  speeches  of  Mr.  Lloyd 
George,  Lord  Lansdowne,  and  Mr.  Churchill,  was  the  speech  of 
Lord  Rosebery  "  to  business  men  of  Glasgow  opposed  to  many 
of  the  principles  of  the  Budget"  on  September  10.  Before  de- 
livering it,  he  resigned  the  Presidency  of  the  Liberal  League ;  and 
thenceforth  was  considered  definitely  to  have  broken  with  the  Lib- 
eral party.  In  his  opening  sentences  Lord  Rosebery  referred  to 
his  independent  position  and  then  dwelt  on  the  immediate  economic 
dangers  set  up  by  the  Budget,  which  he  described  as  "  a  revolution 
without  a  popular  mandate."  He  concentrated  his  attack  on  the 
land  taxes  and  death  duties,  arguing  that  the  former  might  be  ex- 
panded and  their  principles  extended  to  other  forms  of  property, 
but  he  admitted  that  he  should  like  to  see  the  State  settle  "  a  new 

1  This  phrase,  like  Mr.  Lloyd  George's  "baring  cupboards,"  was  often  quoted 
during  the  subsequent  electoral  campaign  by  opponents  of  the  Budget. 


356  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

yeomanry  "  on  the  land  and  give  towns  power  to  cope  with  the  re- 
striction of  their  growth  due  to  the  high  price  of  land.  He  dwelt 
on  the  landlord's  prospective  burdens,  which  fell  not  only  on  dukes, 
"  a  poor  but  honest  class,''  but  on  friendly  societies  and  workmen's 
insurance  companies.  The  death  duties  now  took  "  great  chunks 
of  capital  "  ;  "  scores  of  millions  "  were  lying  idle  in  banks  owing 
to  apprehensions  of  the  Ministerial  policy  ;  the  Budget  was  inquisi- 
torial, tyrannical,  and  Socialistic.  He  laid  great  stress  on  the  exten- 
sion of  taxation  on  gifts  inter  vivos,  asked  what  had  become  of 
retrenchment,  and  thought  "  many  heedless  persons  "  would  prefer 
the  alternative  of  tariff  reform.  He  himself  declined  to  offer  an 
alternative,  but  suggested  retrenchment  on  the  Civil  Service  and 
on  expenditure  on  Ireland.  He  hoped  the  House  of  Lords  would 
not  decide  on  its  action  till  the  Budget  was  in  a  final  shape ;  he 
thought  that  Ministers  wished  it  thrown  out,  because  they  dared 
the  Lords  to  do  so.  "But  its  great  danger  was  Socialism  ;  any  form 
of  Protection  was  an  evil,  but  Socialism  was  "  the  end  of  all "  — 
the  negation  of  faith,  of  family,  of  property,  of  monarchy,  of  the 
Empire.  He  himself  must  go  a  different  road  —  that  of  public  econ- 
omy, of  strengthening  character,  of  preserving  confidence  —  the 
road  by  which  the  English  had  built  up  their  strength  and  dominion. 

Meanwhile,  Committee  and  Report  Stages  of  the  Finance  Bill 
had  been  successfully  passed  in  the  House  of  Commons ;  and  on 
November  2,  the  debate  on  third  reading  was  opened  by  another 
attempt  of  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain  to  secure  its  rejection.  A  large 
number  of  interesting  and  important  speeches  were  delivered  on  this 
occasion,  the  one  by  Mr.  Philip  Snowden  being  given  below  in 
Extract  59  as  a  clear  exposition  on  the  part  of  an  avowed  Socialist 
of  the  relations  between  Socialism  and  the  Budget.  At  length,  on 
November  5,  Mr.  Chamberlain's  amendment  was  rejected  by  379 
votes  to  149,  and  the  Bill  was  passed  up  to  the  House  of  Lords. 

In  the  House  of  Lords,  the  fateful  debate  began  on  Novem- 
ber 23  before  a  great  crowd,  including  the  King  of  Portugal.  The 
Earl  of  Crewe,  in  behalf  of  the  Government,  moved  the  second 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         357 

reading  without  a  speech.  The  Marquess  of  Lansdowne  replied 
with  a  resolution,  "  that  this  House  is  not  justified  in  giving  its  con- 
sent to  this  Bill  until  it  has  been  submitted  to  the  judgment  of 
the  country."  Throughout  the  ensuing  debate,  the  opponents  of 
the  Finance  Bill,  who  constituted  a  large  majority  of  the  House, 
divided  their  attention  between  attacks  upon  the  financial  proposals 
and  apologies  for  their  forthcoming  veto  of  a  money  bill  and  its 
reference  to  the  people,  whilst  the  minority  —  supporters  of  the 
Government  —  undertook  to  defend  the  principles  of  the  Budget 
.and  to  insinuate  that  such  a  veto  on  the  part  of  the  Lords  would 
react  eventually  against  the  independence  of  their  own  House. 
From  a  large  number  of  interesting  speeches,  delivered  at  this 
critical  time,  several  extracts  have  been  selected  to  illustrate  various 
points  of  view.  The  Bishop  of  Bristol  expressed  an  ecclesiastic's 
opposition  to  the  Bill  {^Extract  60)  ;  Lord  Sheffield  expressed  a 
Liberal  lord's  opinion  of  ecclesiastical  opposition  {Extract  61). 
How  bitter  was  the  feeling  of  many  Conservatives  against  Mr. 
Churchill,  and  more  particularly  against  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  ap- 
peared in  the  speech  of  Lord  Willoughby  de  Broke  {Extract  62). 
Lord  Revelstoke  spoke  against  the  Bill  as  the  representative  of 
the  financial  traditions  of  the  Barings  {Extract  6j).  The  Bishop 
of  Birmingham,  in  remarkable  contrast  with  the  Bishop  of  Bristol, 
defended  the  Budget  proposals  as  urgently  required  for  social  needs 
{Extract  64).  Lord  Ribblesdale,  though  supporting  the  Bill,  could 
not  refrain  from  attacking  Mr.  Lloyd  George  {Extract  6^).  An  ex- 
treme view  of  the  havoc  that  might  be  done  to  the  English  Consti- 
tution by  the  adoption  of  the  Budget  was  offered  by  the  Duke  of 
Marlborough  {Extract  66).  The  Earl  of  Rosebery,  always  a  delight- 
ful speaker,  bewailed  the  lamentable  Budget,  but  urged  the  Lords 
not  to  precipitate  a  constitutional  conflict  with  the  Commons,  and  de- 
clared that  he  could  not  vote  either  way  {Extract  6y).  The  attitude 
of  the  Liberal  Government  toward  the  Conservative  majority  in  the 
House  of  Lords  was  well  stated  by  Lord  Morley  of  Blackburn  on 
November  29  {Extract  68),  and  by  the  Earl  of  Crewe,  in  closing 


358  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

debate  the  following  day  (^Extract  6g).  The  Bill  was  defeated  by 
350  votes  to  75,  little  excitement  being  manifested.  Three  bishops 
and  the  Archbishop  of  York  supported  the  Bill ;  the  Bishop  of 
Lincoln  voted  against  it. 

The  country  took  the  rejection  very  quietly.  But  the  Ministry 
was  not  slow  in  replying.  The  day  after  the  rejection  of  the  Bud- 
get by  the  Lords,  the  Commons  reassembled,  and  Mr.  Asquith, 
who  was  enthusiastically  received  by  the  Liberals  and  the  Labour- 
ites, gave  notice  that  he  would  move  on  the  morrow  a  resolution 
"  That  the  action  of  the  House  of  Lords  in  refusing  to  pass  into 
law  the  financial  provision  made  by  the  House  for  the  Service  of 
the  year  is  a  breach  of  the  Constitution  and  a  usurpation  of  the 
rights  of  the  Commons."  The  next  day,  in  a  House  crowded  in 
every  part,  Mr.  Asquith  declared  that  "  the  House  would  be  un- 
worthy of  its  past  and  of  those  traditions  of  which  it  is  the  cus- 
todian and  trustee  "  if  it  allowed  any  time  to  pass  without  showing 
that  it  would  not  brook  this  usurpation.  In  forcible  language  he 
dwelt  upon  the  financial  disorder  created,  and  laid  the  whole  re- 
sponsibility on  the  Peers.  He  ridiculed  the  suggestion  of  a  new 
Budget  which  the  Lords  could  approve  and  announced  that  there 
would  be  a  dissolution  as  early  as  possible,  that  the  new  House 
would  assemble  at  such  a  time  as  would  make  it  possible  to  pro- 
vide "  both  retrospectively  and  prospective!}-  "  for  the  needs  of  the 
financial  year  ;  and,  should  the  Government  be  returned,  its  first 
duty  would  be  to  reimpose  all  the  taxes  and  duties  of  the  Finance 
Bill  and  to  validate  all  past  collections.  Meanwhile  the  duties  at 
the  rates  sanctioned  might  be  deposited  with  the  proper  officials. 
He  then  dealt  with  the  constitutional  question,  insisting  that  the 
Constitution  was  a  matter  of  precedent  and  declaring  that  "  the 
power  of  the  purse  "  which  had  been  used  against  the  usurpation 
of  the  Crown  would  now  be  used  against  that  of  the  Lords.  He 
ridiculed  the  contention  that  the  Bill  was  not  a  Finance  Bill  and 
declared  that  the  right  of  the  Lords  to  refer  the  Commons  to  the 
people  was  "  the  hollowest  political  cant."    The  real  question  was 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        359 

whether,  when  the  Liberals  were  in  power,  the  House  of  Lords 
should  be  omnipotent.  The  Ministry  had  not  provoked  the  chal- 
lenge, but  welcomed  it ;  they  believed  that  the  first  principles  of 
representative  government  were  at  stake,  and  would  ask  the  House 
and  the  electorate  to  declare  that  the  organ  and  voice  of  the  free 
people  of  the  country  was  to  be  found  in  the  elected  representatives 
of  the  people. 

Mr.  Balfour,  replying  for  the  Conservatives,  ridiculed  the  reso- 
lution as  an  abstract  motion,  regretted  its  misrepresentation  of 
constitutional  history,  and  declared  that  such  action  by  the  Lords 
must  be  rare.  He  defended  their  right,  enlarged  on  the  need  of  a 
Second  Chamber  with  substantial  powers,  and  maintained  that  the 
Lords  had  not  exceeded  their  functions.  They  had  done  their  duty, 
and  done  it  fearlessly. 

Mr.  A.  Henderson,  the  Labour  leader,  gave  the  resolution  hearty 
support  on  behalf  of  his  party ;  and,  after  other  remarks,  the  reso- 
lution was  carried  349  to  134.  The  division  was  taken  earlier  than 
members  had  expected,  or  the  Liberal  majority  would  have  been 
nearer  250. 

Parliament  was  prorogued  on  December  3,  1909,  and  subse- 
quently dissolved.  And  the  country  was  called  upon  to  determine 
indirectly  what  should  be  the  fate  of  the  Budget,  of  the  House  of 
Lords,  and  perhaps  of  social  reform. 

The  National  Liberal  Federation  denounced  the  Lords'  action, 
and  demanded  the  veto  as  its  necessary  sequel ;  the  Parliamentary 
Committee  of  the  Trade  Union  Congress  denounced  the  House 
of  Lords  as  a  menace  to  political  freedom,  declared  for  the  Unem- 
ployed Workmen  Bill,  old  age  pensions  at  sixty,  and  the  removal 
of  the  pauper  disqualification,  poor  law  reform  on  the  lines  of  the 
Minority  Report,^  free  education  from  the  primary  school  to  the 
university.  State  payment  of  members  and  returning  officers'  ex- 
penses, the  holding  of  general  elections  on  one  day,  amendment  of 
the  Corrupt  Practices  Act,  adult  suffrage,  redistribution  of  seats, 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  190. 


360  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  abolition  of  plural  voting  and  university  representation,  and 
the  establishment  of  an  eight  hours'  day.  It  urged  Trade  Union- 
ists and  other  wage  earners  to  work  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
supremacy  of  the  Commons  and  the  abolition  of  the  House  of 
Lords.  The  Independent  Labour  Party,  while  agreeing  in  these 
aims,  maintained  its  detachment  from  Liberalism. 

There  was  little  real  development  in  the  political  situation  be- 
tween the  close  of  the  session  in  December,  1909,  and  the  decision 
of  the  electors  in  the  last  fortnight  of  January,  19 10.  The  contro- 
versy centred  around  the  future  of  the  House  of  Lords,  the  merits 
of  the  Budget,  Tariff  Reform,  and  social  betterment.  Mr.  Lloyd 
George  on  January  i  stated  that  "  the  root  trouble  of  our  social 
system  was  the  precariousness  of  living,"  and  foreshadowed  in- 
surance against  unemployment.  Two  days  later,  Mr.  Asquith  de- 
fended at  length  what  his  Government  had  done  on  the  "  outlying 
territory  "  of  the  unemployment  problem  by  old  age  pensions  and 
labour  exchanges,  and  recommended  the  Budget  as  affording  a  com- 
plete and  effectual  alternative  to  Tariff  Reform.  The  Unionists, 
on  their  side,  exalted  the  Empire,  the  Navy,  and  Tariff  Reform, 
condemned  the  Budget  and  the  attacks  on  the  House  of  Lords, 
and  declared  that  any  loss  of  power  by  the  Lords  might  lead  to 
Irish  Home  Rule. 

The  final  results  of  the  elections  of  January,  19 10,  were  :  Liber- 
als, 274;  Unionists,  272  (of  whom  43  were  Liberal  Unionists); 
Labour  party,  41  ;  Nationalists,  7  i  ;  Independent  Nationalists,  1 1. 
Thus  the  Liberals  could  have  a  majority  only  by  the  aid  of  the  Irish 
Nationalist  as  well  as  of  the  Labour  party.  The  Nationalists,  in  the 
main,  were  hostile  to  the  Budget,  but  finally  agreed  to  support  it  in 
the  hope  that  the  Government  would  fulfil  their  pledge  of  abolishing 
the  Lords'  veto  and  so  remove  the  great  obstacle  to  Home  Rule. 

On  February  21,  the  new  Parliament  was  formally  opened. 
After  some  time  spent  in  discussing  the  Veto  Resolutions,^  consid- 
eration of  the  Finance  Bill  of  1909  was  renewed  on  April  18.   The 

1  Cf.  infra,  ch.  ix. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         361 

measure  was  practically  unaltered,  save  a  few  concessions  to  Ire- 
land. The  debate  naturally  traversed  very  familiar  ground,  so  that 
its  review  is  hardly  necessary.  It  passed  a  second  reading  on 
April  25  and  third  reading  two  days  later.  The  Lords  accepted 
the  verdict  of  the  country  as  gracefully  as  possible,  and  the 
much-discussed  Lloyd  George  Budget  received  the  royal  assent  on 
April  29,  1910. 

A  few  illustrative  provisions  of  this  Finance  (1909-10)  Act,  19 10, 
constitute  Extract  yo.  It  should  be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that 
these  provisions  are  qualified  by  a  vast  number  of  exceptions  and  ex- 
planations too  long  and  too  involved  to  incorporate  in  this  volume.] 


Extract  j8 

THE  BUDGET  SPEECH  OF  1909 

[Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  CJiancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Co/nmons, 
April  2Q,  igog) 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  ^ :  .  .  .  I  come  to  the  consideration  of  the 
social  problems  which  are  urgently  pressing  for  solution  —  problems 
affecting  the  lives  of  the  people.  The  solution  of  all  these  questions 
involves  finance.  What  the  Government  have  to  ask  themselves  is 
this :  Can  the  whole  subject  of  further  social  reform  be  postponed 
until  the  increasing  demands  made  upon  the  National  Exchequer 
by  the  growth  of  armaments  has  ceased  ?  Not  merely  can  it  be 
postponed,  but  ought  it  to  be  postponed .''  Is  there  the  slightest 
hope  that  if  we  deferred  consideration  of  the  matter,  we  are  likely 
within  a  generation  to  find  any  more  favourable  moment  for  at- 
tending to  it  ?  And  we  have  to  ask  ourselves  this  further  question : 
If  we  put  off  dealing  with  these  social  sores,  are  the  evils  which 
arise  from  them  hot  likely  to  grow  and  to  fester,  until  finally  the 
loss  which   the   country  sustains   will   be   infinitely  greater  than 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  472  sqq. 


362  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

anything  it  would  have  to  bear  in  paying  the  cost  of  an  imme- 
diate remedy..  There  are  hundreds  of  thousands  of  men,  women, 
and  children  in  this  country  now  enduring  hardships  for  which  the 
sternest  judge  would  not  hold  them  responsible  ;  hardships  entirely 
\y  due  to  circumstances  over  which  they  have  not  the  slightest  com- 
mand ;  the  fluctuations  and  changes  of  trade  —  even  of  fashions  ; 
ill-health  and  the  premature  breakdown  or  death  of  the  bread- 
winner. Owing  to  events  of  this  kind,  all  of  them  beyond  human 
control  —  at  least  beyond  the  control  of  the  victims  —  thousands, 
and  I  am  not  sure  I  should  be  wrong  if  I  said  millions,  are  precipi- 
tated into  a  condition  of  acute  distress  and  poverty.  How  many 
people  there  are  of  this  kind  in  this  wealthy  land  the  figures  of  old 
age  pensions  have  thrown  a  very  unpleasant  light  upon.  Is  it  fair, 
is  it  just,  is  it  humane,  is  it  honourable,  is  it  safe  to  subject  such  a 
multitude  of  our  poor  fellow-countrymen  and  countrywomen  to 
continued  endurance  of  these  miseries  until  nations  have  learnt 
enough  wisdom  not  to  squander  their  resources  on  these  huge 
machines  for  the  destruction  of  human  life  ? 

I  have  no  doubt  as  to  the  answer  which  will  be  given  to  that 
question  by  a  nation  as  rich  in  humanity  as  it  is  in  store.  Last  year, 
whilst  we  were  discussing  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Bill,  all  parties  in 
this  House  recognised  fully  and  freely  that  once  we  had  started  on 
these  lines  the  case  for  extension  was  irresistible.  The  Leader  of 
the  Opposition,  in  what  I  venture  to  regard  as  probably  the  most 
notable  speeches  he  has  delivered  in  this  Parliament  —  I  refer  to 
his  speech  on  the  third  reading  of  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Bill  and 
the  speech  he  delivered  the  other  day  on  the  question  of  unem- 
ployment —  recognised  quite  boldly  that  whichever  party  was  in 
^ power  provision  would  have  to  be  made  in  some  shape  or  other 
for  those  who  are  out  of  work  through  no  fault  of  their  own  and 
those  who  are  incapacitated  for  work  owing  to  physical  causes  for 
which  they  are  not  responsible.  And  there  was  at  least  one  exten- 
sion of  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act  which  received  the  unanimous 
assent  of  the  House  and  which  the  Government  were  pressed  to 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         363 

give  not  merely  a  Parliamentary  but  a  Statutory  pledge  to  execute. 
I  refer  to  the  proposal  to  extend  the  pension  to  the  meritorious 
pauper.  .  .  . 

But  still,  all  those  who  have  given  any  thought  and  study  to 
this  question  must  realise  that  the  inclusion  of  the  septuagenarian 
pauper  is  but  a  very  small  part  of  the  problem  which  awaits  solu- 
tion —  a  problem  of  human  suffering  which  does  not  become  any 
easier  of  solution  by  postponement.  On  the  contrary,  the  longer 
we  defer  the  task  of  grappling  with  it  the  more  tangled  and  the 
more  desperate  it  becomes.  We  are  pledged,  definitely  pledged,  by 
speeches  from  the  Prirne  Minister  given  both  in  the  House  and 
outside,  to  supplementing  our  old  age  pensions   proposals.   .   .   . 

What  are  the  dominating  causes  of  poverty  amongst  the  indus- 
trial classes  ?  For  the  moment  I  do  not  refer  to  the  poverty  which 
is  brought  about  by  a  man's  own  fault.  I  am  only  alluding  to 
causes  over  which  he  has  no  control.  Old  age,  premature  break- 
down in  health  and  strength,  the  death  of  the  breadwinner,  and 
unemployment  due  either  to  the  decay  of  industries  and  season- 
able demands,  or  the  fluctuations  or  depressions  in  trade.  The 
distress  caused  by  any  or  either  of  these  causes  is  much  more 
deserving  of  immediate  attention  than  the  case  of  a  healthy  and 
vigorous  man  of  65  years  of  age,  who  is  able  to  pursue  his  daily 
vocation,  and  to  earn  without  undue  strain  an  income  which  is 
quite  considerable  enough  to  provide  him  and  his  wife  with  a 
comfortable  subsistence. 

When  Bismarck  was  strengthening  the  foundations  of  the  new 
German  Empire  one  of  the  very  first  tasks  he  undertook  was  the 
organisation  of  a  scheme  which  insured  the  German  workmen  and 
their  families  against  the  worst  evils  which  ensue  from  these  com- 
mon accidents  of  life.  And  a  superb  scheme  it  is.  It  has  saved  an 
incalculable  amount  of  human  misery  to  hundreds  of  thousands 
and  possibly  millions  of  people  who  never  deserved  it. 

Wherever  I  went  in  Germany,  north  or  south,  and  whomever  I 
met,  whether  it  was  an  employer  qv  a  workman,  a  Conservative 


364  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

or  a  Liberal,  a  Socialist  or  a  Trade  Union  leader  —  men  of  all 
ranks,  sections  and  creeds  of  one  accord  joined  in  lauding  the  bene- 
fits which  have  been  conferred  upon  Germany  by  this  beneficent 
policy.  Several  granted  extensions,  but  there  was  not  one  who 
wanted  to  go  back.  The  employers  admitted  that  at  first  they  did 
not  quite  like  the  new  burdens  it  cast  upon  them,  but  they  now 
fully  realised  the  advantages  which  even  they  derived  from  the  ex- 
penditure, for  it  had  raised  the  standard  of  the  workman  through- 
out Germany.  By  removing  that  element  of  anxiety  and  worry 
from  their  lives  it  had  improved  their  efficiency.  Benefits  which  in 
the  aggregate  amounted  to  forty  millions  a  year  were  being  dis- 
tributed under  this  plan.  When  I  was  there  the  Government  were 
contemplating  an  enlargement  of  its  operation  which  would  extend 
its  benefits  to  clerks  and  to  the  widows  and  orphans  of  the  indus- 
trial population.  They  anticipated  that  when  complete  the  total 
cost  of  the  scheme  would  be  fifty-three  millions  a  year.   .   .   . 

In  this  country  we  have  already  provided  for  the  aged  over 
seventy.  We  have  made  pretty  complete  provision  for  accidents. 
All  we  have  now  left  to  do  in  order  to  put  ourselves  on  a  level 
with  Germany  —  I  hope  our  competition  with  Germany  will  not 
be  in  armaments  alone  —  is  to  make  some  further  provision  for 
the  sick,  for  the  invalided,  for  widows  and  orphans.  In  a  well- 
thought-out  scheme,  involving  contributions  from  the  classes  di- 
rectly concerned,  the  proportion  borne  by  the  State  need  not,  in 
my  judgment,  be  a  very  heavy  one,  and  is  well  within  the  compass 
of  our  financial  capacity  without  undue  strain  upon  the  resources 
of  the  country. 

The  Government  are  also  pledged  to  deal  on  a  comprehensive 
scale  with  the  problem  of  unemployment.  The  pledges  given  by 
the  Prime  Minister  on  behalf  of  the  Government  are  specific  and 
repeated.  I  do  not  wish  to  encourage  any  false  hopes.  Nothing 
that  a  Government  can  do,  at  any  rate  with  the  present  organisa- 
tion of  society,  can  prevent  the  fluctuations  and  the  changes  in 
trade  and  industry  which  produce  unemployment.  A  trade  decays, 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         365 

and  the  men  who  are  engaged  in  it  are  thrown  out  of  work.  We 
have  had  an  illustration  within  the  last  few  days,  to  which  Lord 
Rosebery  has  so  opportunely  called  our  attention,  in  the  privation 
suffered  by  the  horse  cabdriver,  owing  to  the  substitution  of  me- 
chanical for  horse  traction.  That  is  only  one  case  out  of  many 
constantly  happening  in  every  country.  Then  there  are  the  fluctu- 
ations of  business  which  at  one  moment  fill  a  workshop  with  orders 
which  even  overtime  cannot  cope  with,  and  at  another  moment 
leave  the  same  workshops  with  rusting  machinery  for  lack  of  some- 
thing to  do.  Trade  has  its  currents,  and  its  tides,  and  its  storms, 
and  its  calms,  like  the  sea,  which  seem  to  be  almost  just  as  little 
under  human  control,  or,  at  any  rate,  just  as  little  under  the  con- 
trol of  the  victims  of  these  changes,  and  to  say  that  you  can  estab- 
lish by  any  system  an  absolute  equilibrium  in  the  trade  and  concerns 
of  the  country  is  to  make  a  promise  which  no  man  of  intelligence 
would  ever  undertake  to  honour.  You  might  as  well  promise  to 
flatten  out  the  Atlantic  Ocean.  But  still,  it  is  poor  seamanship 
that  puts  out  to  sea  without  recognising  its  restlessness,  and  the 
changefulness  of  the  weather,  and  the  perils  and  suffering  thus 
produced.  These  perils  of  trade  depression  come  at  regular  inter- 
vals, and  every  time  they  arrive  they  bring  with  them  an  enormous 
amount  of  distress.  It  is  the  business  of  statesmanship  to  recog- 
nise that  fact  and  to  address  itself  with  courage  and  resolution  to 
provide  against  it.  .  .  . 

InsiiraJice  against  Unemployment 

p\.ny  insurance  scheme  .  .  .  must  necessarily  require  contribu- 
tions from  those  engaged  in  the  insured  trades  both  as  employers 
and  employed ;  but  we  recognise  the  necessity  of  meeting  these 
contributions  by  a  State  grant  and  guarantee.  We  cannot,  of 
course,  attempt  to  pass  the  necessary  Bill  to  establish  unemploy- 
ment insurance  during  the  present  Session.  But  the  postponement 
will  not  involve  any  real  delay,  for  the  establishment  of  labour  ex- 
changes is  a  necessary  preliminary  to  the  work  of  insurance,  and 


366  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

this  will  occupy  time  which  may  also  be  advantageously  employed 
in  consulting  the  various  interests  upon  the  details  of  the  scheme 
and  in  co-ordinating  its  financial  provisions  with  the  machinery  of 
invalidity  and  other  forms  of  insurance. 

Developynent  Scheme 

So  much  for  the  provision  which  we  hope  to  be  able  to  make 
for  those  who,  under  the  changing  conditions  which  are  inevitable  in 
trade  and  commerce,  are  temporarily  thrown  out  of  employment. 
We  do  not  put  this  forward  as  a  complete  or  an  adequate  remedy 
for  all  the  evils  of  unemployment,  and  we  do  not  contend  that 
when  this  insurance  scheme  has  been  set  up  and  financed  the 
^  State  has  thereby  done  all  in  its  power  to  help  towards  solving  the 
problem."'  After  all,  it  is  infinitely  better,  in  the  interests  both  of 
the  community  and  of  the  unemployed  themselves,  that  the  latter 
should  be  engaged  on  remunerative  work,  than  that  they  should 
be  drawing  an  allowance  from  the  most  skilfully-contrived  system 
of  insurance.  This  country  is  small  —  I  suppose  it  is  the  smallest 
great  country  in  the  world  —  but  we  have  by  no  means  exhausted 
its  possibilities  for  healthy  and  productive  employment.  It  is  no 
part  of  the  function  of  a  Government  to  create  work ;  but  it  is  an 
essential  part  of  its  business  to  see  that  the  people  are  equipped 
to  make  the  best  of  their  own  country,  are  permitted  to  make  the 
best  of  their  own  country,  and,  if  necessary,  are  helped  to  make 
the  best  of  their  own  countr}\  [Cheers.]  ...  A  State  can  and 
ought  to  take  a  longer  view  and  a  wider  view  of  its  investments 
than  individuals.  The  resettlement  of  deserted  and  impoverished 
parts  of  its  own  territories  may  not  bring  to  its  coffers  a  direct  re- 
turn which  would  reimburse  it  fully  for  its  expenditure ;  but  the 
indirect  enrichment  of  its  resources  more  than  compensates  it  for 
any  apparent  and  immediate  loss.  The  individual  can  rarely  afford 
to  wait,  a  State  can  ;  the  individual  must  judge  of  the  success  of 
his  enterprise  by  the  testimony  given  for  it  by  his  bank  book ;  a 
State  keeps  many  ledgers,  not  all  in  ink,  and  when  we  wish  to 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         367 

judge  of  the  advantage  derived  by  a  country  from  a  costly  experi- 
ment we  must  examine  all  those  books  before  we  venture  to  pro- 
nounce judgment.   .   .  . 

Afforestation 

This  brings  me  straight  to  the  question  of  afforestation.  There 
is  a  very  general  agreement  that  some  steps  should  be  taken  in 
the  direction,  I  will  not  say  of  afforesting,  but  of  reafforesting  the 
waste  lands  of  this  country.  Here,  again,  we  are  far  behind  every 
other  civilised  country  in  the  world.  I  have  figures  here  on  this 
point  which  are  very  interesting.  In  Germany,  for  instance,  out  of 
a  total  area  of  133,000,000  acres,  34,000,000,  or  nearly  26  per 
cent,  are  wooded;  in  France,  out  of  130,000,000  acres,  17  per 
cent ;  even  in  a  small  and  densely-populated  country  such  as 
Belgium  1,260,000  acres  are  wooded,  or  17  per  cent,  out  of  a  total 
area  of  7,280,000  acres.  Again,  in  the  Netherlands  and  Denmark, 
out  of  total  areas  of  8,000,000  and  9,500,000  acres  respectively, 
over  600,000  acres,  or  between  7  and  8  per  cent,  are  wooded.  In 
the  United  Kingdom,  on  the  other  hand,  out  of  77,000,000  acres, 
only  3,000,000,  or  4  per  cent,  are  under  wood. 

Sir  Herbert  Maxwell,  who  has  made  a  study  of  this  question  for 
a  good  many  years,  and  whose  moderation  of  statement  is  beyond 
challenge,  estimates  that,  in  1906,  "^8,000,000  were  paid  annually 
in  salaries  for  the  administration,  formation  and  preservation  of 
German  Forests,  representing  the  maintenance  of  about  200,000 
families  or  about  1,000,000  souls,"  and  that,  "in  working  up  the 
raw  material  yielded  by  the  forests,  wages  were  earned  annually  to 
the  amount  of  ^30,000,000  sterling,  maintaining  about  600,000 
families,  or  3,000,000  souls." 

Anyone  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  search  out  the  Census 
Returns  will  find  out  that  the  number  of  people  directly  employed 
in  forest  work  in  this  country  is  only  16,000.  And  yet  the  soil  and 
the  climate  of  this  country  are  just  as  well  adapted  for  the  growth 
of  marketable  trees  as  that  of  the  States  of  Germany.   .  .  . 


368  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Encouragement  of  Agriciilhire 

.  .  .  We  are  not  getting  out  of  the  land  anything  like  what  it  is 
capable  of  endowing  us  with.  Of  the  enormous  quantity  of  agricul- 
tural and  dairy  produce  and  fruit,  and  of  the  timber  which  is  im- 
ported into  this  country,  a  considerable  portion  could  be  raised  on 
our  own  lands.  There  hon.  Members  opposite  and  ourselves  will 
agree.  The  only  difference  is  as  to  the  remedy.  In  our  opinion, 
the  remedy  which  they  suggest  would  make  food  costlier  and  more 
inaccessible  for  the  people  ;  the  remedies  which  we  propose,  on  the 
other  hand,  would  make  food  more  abundant,  better,  and  cheaper. 
What  is  it  we  propose  ?  —  and,  let  the  Committee  observe,  I  am 
only  dealing  with  that  part  of  the  problem  which  affects  finance. 

National  DevelopmeJit  Grant 

I  will  tell  the  House  therefore,  briefly,  what  I  propose  doing  in 
regard  to  this  and  all  kindred  matters  I  have  dwelt  upon.  There 
is  a  certain  amount  of  money  — •  not  very  much  —  spent  in  this 
country  in  a  spasmodic  kind  of  way  on  what  I  call  the  work  of 
national  development  —  in  light  railways,  in  harbours,  in  indirect 
but  very  meagre  assistance  to  agriculture.  I  propose  to  gather  all 
these  grants  together  into  one  Development  Grant,  and  to  put  in 
this  year  an  additional  sum  of  ^200,000.  Legislation  will  have  to 
be  introduced,  and  I  will  then  explain  the  methods  of  administra- 
tion and  the  objects  in  greater  detail,  but  the  grant  will  be  utilised 
in  the  promoting  of  schemes  which  have  for  their  purpose  the 
development  of  the  resources  of  the  country.  It  will  include  such 
objects  as  the  institution  of  schools  of  forestry,  the  purchase  and 
preparation  of  land  for  afforestation,  the  setting  up  of  a  number 
of  experimental  forests  on  a  large  scale,  expenditure  upon  scientific 
research  in  the  interests  of  agriculture,  experimental  farms,  the  im- 
provement of  stock  —  as  to  which  there  have  been  a  great  many 
demands  from  people  engaged  in  agriculture,  the  equipment  of 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         369 

agencies  for  disseminating  agricultural  instruction,  the  encourage- 
ment and  promotion  of  co-operation,  the  improvement  of  rural 
transport  so  as  to  make  markets  more  accessible,  the  facilitation 
of  all  well-considered  schemes  and  measures  for  attracting  labour 
back  to  the  land  by  small  holdings  or  reclamation  of  wastes.  Every 
acre  of  land  brought  into  cultivation,  every  acre  of  cultivated  land 
brought  into  a  higher  state  of  cultivation,  means  more  labour  of  a 
healthy  and  productive  character.  It  means  more  abundant  food 
—  cheaper  and  better  food  for  the  people.   .   .   . 

Principles  0/  Taxation 

Now  what  are  the  principles  upon  which  I  intend  to  proceed  in 
getting  .  .  .  taxes }  The  first  principal  on  which  I  base  my  finan- 
cial proposals  is  this  —  that  taxation  which  I  suggest  should  be  im- 
posed, while  yielding  in  the  present  year  not  more  than  sufficient 
to  meet  this  year's  requirements,  should  be  of  such  a  character 
that  it  will  produce  enough  revenue  in  the  second  year  to^cover 
the  whole  of  our  estimated  liabilities  for  that  year.  Andf-jjiore-  ^ 
over,  that  it  will  be  of  such  an  expansive  character  as  to  growv 
with  the  growing  demand  of  the  social  programme  which  I  have 
sketched  without  involving  the  necessity  for  imposing  fresh  taxa- 
tion in  addition  to  what  I  am  asking  Parliament  to  sanction  at  the 
present  time.  The  second  principle  on  which  I  base  my  proposals 
is  that  the  taxes  should  be  of  such  a  character  as  not  to  inflict  any 
injury  on  that-  trade  or  commerce  which  constitutes  the  sources  of 
our  wealth.  / 

My  third  principle  is  this,  that  all  classes  of  the  community  in  / 
this  financial  emergency  ought  to  be  called  upon  to  contribute] 
I  have  never  been  able  to  accept  the  theory  which  I  have  seen 
advanced  that  you  ought  to  draw  a  hard-and-fast  line  at  definite 
incomes  and  say  that  no  person  under  a  certain  figure  should  be 
expected  to  contribute  a  penny  towards  the  burden  of  the  good 
government  of  the  country.    In  my  judgment  all  should  be  called 


370  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

upon  to  bear  their  share.  No  voluntary  association,  religious  or 
philanthropic  or  provident,  has  ever  been  run  on  the  principle  of 
exempting  any  section  of  its  membership  from  subscription.  They 
all  contribute,  even  to  the  widow's  mite.  It  is  considered  not 
merely  the  duty,  but  the  privilege  and  pride  of  all  to  share  in  the 
common  burden,  and  the  sacrifice  is  as  widely  distributed  as  is 
the  responsibility  and  the  profit.  At  the  same  time,  when  you 
come  to  consider  whether  the  bulk  of  the  taxation  is  to  be  raised 
by  direct  or  indirect  means,  I  must  point  out  at  this  stage  —  I  shall 
have  a  little  more  to  say  on  this  subject  later  on  —  that  the  indus- 
trial classes,  in  my  judgment,  upon  a  close  examination  of  their 
contributions  to  local  and  Imperial  finance,  are  paying  more  in 
proportion  to  their  incomes  than  those  who  are  better  off.  Their 
proportion  to  local  finances  especially  is  heavier,  because,  although 
nominally  the  rates  are  not  paid  by  them,  as  everyone  knows,  they 
•are  really.  For  that  reason  the  burden  at  the  present  moment  of 
new  taxation  bears  much  more  heavily  in  proportion  to  their' income 
on  that  class  than  it  does  upon  the  wealthier  and  better-to-do  classes. 

New  Taxation  —  Motor  Cars 

I  now  come  —  and  I  trust  that  the  Committee  will  not  think 
that  I  have  delayed  too  long  —  to  the  most  interesting  and  the 
most  difficult  part  of  my  task,  the  explanation  of  the  various  pro- 
posals for  fresh  taxation  which  I  have  to  lay  before  them.  I  think 
it  will  be  to  the  convenience  of  the  Committee  if  I  deal  first  with 
motor  cars.   .   .   . 

I  propose  to  substitute  ...  a  new  and  increased  scale,  with 
graduations,  which  will  come  into  force  next  January  for  the  whole 
of  the  United  Kingdom,  and  I  have  decided  to  base  the  scale  on 
the  power  of  the  cars  and  not  on  the  weight.  The  horse-power 
will  be  determined  in  accordance  with  regulations  made  by  the 
Treasury,  and  in  the  case  of  petrol  cars  with  reference  to  the  bore 
of  the  cylinders.   .   .   . 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        371 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  tax  rises  rapidly  when  we  get  to  cars 
over  40  horse-power  —  a  provision  with  which  1  think  the  Com- 
mittee will  not  quarrel.  Doctors'  cars  I  propose  to  charge  at  one- 
half  these  rates.    Motor  cycles  I  would  charge  at  the  uniform  rate 

of  ;^I.     .     .     . 

One  of  the  chief  reasons  for  imposing  additional  taxation  on 
motor  cars  is  the  fact  that  the  increase  in  their  numbers  necessi- 
tates a  reorganisation  of  our  main-road  system,  and  it  will  be 
obvious  that,  were  I  to  confine  taxation  to  a  mere  re-adjustment 
of  the  scale  of  licence  duties,  the  burden  would  be  imposed  with 
absolutely  no  relation  to  the  extent  that  the  car  might  use  the 
roads.  Some  cars  are  out  four  or  five  hours  a  day  all  the  year 
round,  others  are  used  but  rarely,  and  I  believe  that,  were  I  to 
obtain  anything  like  adequate  contribution  from  motor  cars  entirely 
by  direct  taxation,  I  might  hinder  to  some  extent  the  development 
of  the  motor  industry  by  discouraging  persons  from  keeping  a 
motor,  or  an  additional  motor,  should  they  only  want  it  for  occa- 
sional use.  I,  therefore,  propose  to  put  a  tax  of  3d.  per  gallon  on 
all  petrol  used  for  motor  vehicles.  ... 

Direct  Taxation 

Now  I  come  to  my  direct  taxation.  It  must  be  obvious  that  in 
meeting  a  large  deficit  of  this  kind  I  should  be  exceedingly  unwise 
if  I  were  to  trust  to  speculative  or  fancy  taxes.  I  therefore  pro- 
pose, first  of  all,  to  raise  more  money  out  of  the  income  tax  and 
estate  duties.  Income  tax  in  this  country  only  begins  when  the 
margin  of  necessity  has  been  crossed  and  the  domain  of  comfort 
and  even  of  gentility  has  been  reached.  A  man  who  enjoys  an 
income  of  over  ^3  a  week  need  not  stint  himself  or  his  family  of 
reasonable  food  or  of  clothes  and  shelter.  There  may  be  an  excep- 
tion in  the  case  of  a  man  with  a  family,  whose  gentility  is  part  of 
his  stock  in  trade  or  the  uniform  of  his  craft.  Then,  I  agree,  often 
things  go  hard. 


372  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Then  when  you  come  to  estate  duties,  what  a  man  bequeaths, 
after  all,  represents  what  is  left  after  he  has  provided  for  all  his 
own  wants  in  life.  Beyond  a  certain  figure  it  also  represents  all 
that  is  essential  to  keep  his  family  in  the  necessaries  of  life.  The 
figure  which  the  experience  of  seventy  years  has  sanctified  as  being 
that  which  divides  sufficiency  from  gentility  is  ;^i5o  to  ^i6o  a 
year.  A  capital  sum  that  would,  if  invested  in  safe  securities,  provide 
anything  over  that  sum  ought  to  be  placed  in  a  different  category 
from  any  sum  which  is  below  that  figure. 

There  is  one  observation  which  is  common  to  income  tax  and 
the  death  duties,  more  especially  with  the  higher  scales.  What  is 
it  that  has  enabled  the  fortunate  possessors  of  these  incomes  and 
these  fortunes  to  amass  the  wealth  they  enjoy  or  bequeath  ?  The 
security  insured  for  property  by  the  agency  of  the  State,  the  guar- 
anteed immunity  from  the  risks  and  destruction  of  war,  insured 
by  our  natural  advantages  and  our  defensive  forces.  This  is  an 
essential  element  even  now  in  the  credit  of  the  country ;  and,  in 
the  past,  it  means  that  we  were  accumulating  great  wealth  in  this 
land,  when  the  industrial  enterprises  of  less  fortunately  situated 
countries  were  not  merely  at  a  standstill,  but  their  resources  were 
being  ravaged  and  destroyed  by  the  havoc  of  war.  What,  more, 
is  accountable  for  this  growth  of  wealth  ?  The  spread  of  intelli- 
gence amongst  the  masses  of  the  people,  the  improvements  in 
sanitation  and  in  the  general  condition  of  the  people.  These  have 
all  contributed  towards  the  efficiency  of  the  people,  even  as  wealth- 
producing  machines.  Take,  for  instance,  such  legislation  as  the 
Education  Acts  and  the  Public  Health  Acts ;  they  have  cost  much 
money,  but  they  have  made  infinitely  more.  That  is  true  of  all 
legislation  which  improves  the  conditions  of  life  of  the  people.  An 
educated,  well-fed,  well-clothed,  well-housed  people  invariably  leads 
to  the  growth  of  a  numerous  well-to-do  class.  If  property  were  to 
grudge  a  substantial  contribution  towards  proposals  which  insure 
the  security  which  is  one  of  the  essential  conditions  of  its  existence, 
.or  towards  keeping  from    poverty  and  privation  the  old  people 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        373 

whose  lives  of  industry  and  toil  have  either  created  that  wealth 
or  made  it  productive,  then  property  would  be  not  only  shabby 
but  short-sighted. 

Inco7ne  Tax 

.  .  .  Notwithstanding  the  relief  given  by  the  Finance  Act  of  1907, 
the  burden  of  the  income  tax  upon  earnings  is  still  disproportion- 
ately heavy.  While,  therefore,  I  propose  to  raise  the  general  rate 
at  which  the  tax  is  calculated,  I  propose  that  the  rates  upon  earned 
income  in  the  case  of  persons  whose  total  income  does  not  exceed 
;^3ooo  should  remain  as  at  present,  namely,  gd.  in  the  pound  up 
to  ;^2ooo,  and  is.  in  the  pound  between  ;^2ooo  and  ^3000. 
In  respect  of  all  other  incomes  now  liable  to  the  is.  rate  I  propose 
to  raise  the  rate  from  is.  to  is.  2d. 


Abatement  on  Children 

In  the  case  of  incomes  not  exceeding  ;^5oo,  the  pressure  of  the 
tax,  notwithstanding  the  abatements  at  present  allowed,  is  sorely 
felt  by  taxpayers  who  have  growing  families  to  support,  and  al- 
though a  comparatively  trifling  additional  burthen  will  be  imposed 
upon  them  by  the  increased  rate,  since  the  aggregate  income  of 
this  class  is  to  the  extent  of  at  least  four-fifths  exclusively  earned 
income,  I  think  that  even  upon  the  present  basis  they  have  a  strong 
claim  to  further  relief.  .  .  .  And  I  propose  that  for  all  incomes 
under  ;^5oo,  in  addition  to  the  existing  abatements,  there  shall 
be  allowed  from  the  income  in  respect  of  which  the  tax  is  paid  a 
special  abatement  of  ;^io  for  every  child  under  the  age  of  16 
years.  .  .  . 

Income  (super)  tax 

The  imposition  of  a  super-tax,  however,  upon  large  incomes  on 
the  lines  suggested  by  the  Select  Committee  of  1906  is  a  practi- 
cable proposition,  and  it  is  upon  this  basis  that  I  intend  to  proceed. 


374  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Such  a  super-tax  might  take  the  form  of  ...  a  uniform  tax  not 
upon  the  total  income,  but  upon  the  amount  only  by  which  the 
income  exceeded  a  certain  fixed  amount  which  would  naturally, 
but  need  not  necessarily,  be  the  amount  of  the  minimum  income 
which  attracts  the  tax.  We  might  begin,  say,  at  ;^3ooo,  and  levy 
the  new  tax  upon  all  income  in  excess  of  ^3000,  or  at  ^5000, 
and  levy  the  tax  upon  income  in  excess  of  ;^5ooo.  In  the  former 
case  some  25,000  assessments  would  be  required,  in  the  latter 
only  10,000  —  from  the  point  of  view  of  administration  a  very 
strong  argument  in  favour  of  the  adoption  of  the  higher  figure,  at 
any  rate  in  the  first  instance.  .  .  .  Therefore  I  propose  to  limit 
the  tax  to  incomes  exceeding  ;^5ooo,  and  to  levy  it  upon  the 
amount  by  which  such  incomes  exceed  ;i^3ooo,  and  at  the  rate  of 
6d.  in  the  pound  upon  the  amount  of  such  excess.  An  income  of 
_;^5ooi  will  thus  pay  in  super-tax  6d.  in  the  pound  on  ^2001.  .  .  . 
Assessments  to  the  new  tax  will  be  based  upon  the  Returns  of 
total  income  from  all  sources,  which  will  be  required  from  persons 
assessable.  The  machinery  will  be,  in  the  main,  independent  of 
the  machinery  of  the  existing  income  tax,  but  the  assessments  will 
be  made  by  the  special  Commissioners  appointed  under  the  Income 
Tax  Acts,  and  assessable  income  will  be  determined  according  to 
the  rules  laid  down  in  the  income  tax  schedules.  .  .  . 

My  last  proposal  relating  to  the  income  tax  is  the  restriction  of 
the  exemptions  and  abatements  to  persons  resident  in  the  United 
Kingdom.  .   .   . 

Death  Duties 

The  proposals  I  have  to  make  with  regard  to  the  death  duties 
are  of  a  very  simple  character.  The  great  reconstruction  of  these 
duties  in  1894,  which  will  always  be  associated  with  the  name  of 
Sir  William  Harcourt,  has  given  us  a  scheme  of  taxation  which  is 
at  once  logical  and  self-consistent  as  a  system,  and  a  revenue- 
producing  machine  of  very  high  efficiency.  Apart,  therefore,  from 
one  or  two  minor  changes  in  the  law,  which  experience  has  shown 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         375 

to  be  desirable,  I  intend  to  confine  my  attention  to  adjusting  the 
rates  with  a  view  to  increasing  the  yield  without  altering  the  basis 
on  which  the  duties  are  levied.   ... 

Stamp  Duties 

Under  the  head  of  stamp  duties  I  propose  to  increase  the  duty 
upon  conveyances  on  sale  from  los.  to  20s.  per  cent,  an  exemption 
from  the  increased  rate  being  made  in  favour  of  conveyances  of 
stock  or  marketable  securities  which,  by  reason  of  the  greater  fre- 
quency with  which  they  change  hands,  in  comparison  with  other 
kinds  of  property,  bear  a  disproportionate  burthen  under  the  present 
uniform  scale.  The  greater  part  of  the  additional  revenue  under 
this  head  will  be  derived  from  transfers  of  real  property.   .   .   . 

Licences 

[A  new,  and,  on  the  whole,  higher,  scale  of  licencing  duties 
advocated.] 

Taxation  of  Land 

.  .  .  The  first  conviction  that  is  borne  in  upon  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  who  examines  land  as  a  subject  for  taxation  is 
this :  that  in  order  to  do  justice  he  must  draw  a  broad  distinction 
between  land  whose  value  is  purely  agricultural  in  its  character  and 
composition,  and  land  which  has  a  special  value  attached  to  it,  owing 
either  to  the  fact  of  its  covering  marketable  mineral  deposits  or  be- 
cause of  its  proximity  to  any  concentration  of  people.  Agricultural 
land  has  not,  during  the  past  twenty  or  thirty  years,  appreciated  in 
value  in  this  country.  In  some  parts  it  has  probably  gone  down. 
I  know  parts  of  the  country  where  the  value  has  gone  up.  But 
there  has  been  an  enormous  increase  in  the  value  of  urban  land 
and  of  mineral  property.  And  a  still  more  important  and  relevant 
consideration  in  examining  the  respective  merits  of  these  two  or 
three  classes  of  claimants  to  taxation  is  this :  the  growth  in  the 
value,  more  especially  of  urban  sites,  is  due  to  no  expenditure  of 


/ 


376  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

capital  or  thought  on  the  part  of  the  ground  owner,  but  entirely- 
owing  to  the  energy  and  the  enterprise  of  the  community.  .  .  . 
Still  worse,  the  urban  landowner  is  freed  in  practice  from  the 
ordinary  social  obligations  which  are  acknowledged  by  every 
agricultural  landowner  towards  those  whose  labour  makes  their 
wealth.  .  .  .  The  rural  landowner  has  the  obligation  to  provide 
buildings  and  keep  them  in  repair.  The  urban  landowner,  as  a 
rule,  has  neither  of  these  two  obligations.  There  is  that  essential 
difference  between  the  two.  The  urban  landlord  and  the  mineral 
royalty  owner  are  invariably  rack-renters.  They  extort  the  highest 
and  the  heaviest  ground  rent  or  royalty  they  can  obtain  on  the 
\J  sternest  commercial  principles.  They  are  never  restrained  by  that 
sense  of  personal  relationship  with  their  tenants  which  exercises 
such  a  beneficent  and  moderating  influence  upon  the  very  same 
landlord  in  his  dealings  with  his  agricultural  tenants.  And  the  dis- 
tinction is  not  confined  merely  to  the  rent.  Take  the  conditions  of 
the  tenancy.  I  am  not  here  to  defend  many  of  the  terms  which 
are  included  in  many  an  agricultural  agreement  for  tenancy.  I 
think  many  of  them  are  oppressive,  irritating,  and  stupid.  But 
compared  with  the  conditions  imposed  upon  either  a  colliery  owner 
or  upon  a  town  lessee  they  are  the  very  climax  of  generosity.  Take 
this  case  —  and  it  is  not  by  any  means  irrelevant  to  the  proposals 
which  I  shall  have  to  submit  to  the  Committee  later  on.  What 
agricultural  landlord  in  this  country  would  ever  think  of  letting  his 
farm  for  a  term  of  years  on  condition,  first  of  all,  that  the  tenant 
should  pay  the  most  extortionate  rent  that  he  could  possibly  secure 
in  the  market,  three,  or  four,  or  even  five  times  the  real  value  of 
the  soil ;  that  the  tenant  should  then  be  compelled  to  build  a  house 
of  a  certain  size  and  at  a  certain  cost,  and  in  a  certain  way,  and 
that  at  the  end  of  the  term  he,  or  rather  his  representatives,  should 
hand  that  house  over  in  good  tenantable  repair  free  from  encum- 
brances to  the  representatives  of  the  ground  owner  who  has  not 
spent  a  penny  upon  constructing  it,  and  who  has  received  during 
the  whole  term  of  lease  the  highest  rent  which  he  could  possibly 


THE    LLOYD   CiEORGE   BUDGET  T^yy 

screw  in  respect  of  the  site  ?  \\liy,  there  is  not  a  landlord  in  Great 
Britain  who  would  ever  dream  of  imposing  such  outrageous  con- 
ditions upon  his  tenant.  And  yet  these  are  the  conditions  which 
are  imposed  every  day  in  respect  of  urban  sites ;  imposed  upon 
tradesmen  who  have  no  choice  in  the  matter ;  imposed  upon  pro- 
fessional men  and  business  men  who  have  got  to  live  somewhere 
within  reasonable  distance  of  their  offices  ;  imposed  even  on  work- 
men building  a  house  for  themselves,  paying  for  it  by  monthly 
instalments  out  of  their  wages  for  thirty  years  purely  in  order  to 
be  within  reasonable  distance  of  the  factory  or  mine  or  workshop 
at  which  they  are  earning  a  living.   .   .   . 

My  present  proposals  are  proposals  both  for  taxation  and  for 
valuation.  Although  very  moderate  in  character,  they  will  produce 
an  appreciable  revenue  in  the  present  year  and  more  in  future 
years.    The  proposals  are  three  in  number. 

Uiicanu'd  Jticirmoit 

First,  it  is  proposed  to  levy  a  tax  on  the  increment  of  value 
accruing  to  land  from  the  enterprise  of  the  community  or  the 
landowner's  neighbours.  .  .  .  The  valuations  upon  the  difference 
between  which  the  tax  will  be  chargeable  will  be  valuations  of  the 
land  itself  —  apart  from  buildings  and  other  improvements  —  and 
of  this  difference,  the  strictly  unearned  increment,  we  propose  to 
take  one-fifth,  or  20  per  cent,  for  the  State.   .   .   . 

Duty  on  Undeveloped  Land 

The  second  proposal  relating  to  land  is  the  imposition  of  a 
tax  on  the  capital  value  of  all  land  which  is  not  used  to  the  best 
advantage.  The  owner  of  valuable  land  which  is  required  or  likely 
in  the  near  future  to  be  required  for  building  purposes,  who  con- 
tents himself  with  an  income  therefrom  wholly  incommensurate 
with  the  capital  value  of  the  land  in  the  hope  of  recouping  himself 
ultimately  in  the  shape  of  an  increased  price,  is  in  a  similar  position 
to  the  investor  in  securities  who  re-invests  the  greater  part  of  his 


378  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

dividends ;  but  while  the  latter  is  required  to  pay  income  tax  both 
upon  the  portion  of  the  dividends  enjoyed  and  also  upon  the  portion 
re-invested,  the  former  escapes  taxation  upon  his  accumulating  capi- 
tal altogether,  and  this,  although  the  latter  by  his  self-denial  is  increas- 
ing the  wealth  of  the  community,  while  the  former,  by  withholding 
from  the  market  land  which  is  required  for  housing  or  industry,  is 
creating  a  speculative  inflation  of  values  which  is  socially  mischievous. 
/  We  propose  to  redress  this  anomaly  by  charging  an  annual  duty 
of  hd.  in  the  pound  on  the  capital  value  of  undeveloped  land.  The 
same  principle  applies  to  ungotten  minerals,  which  we  propose 
similarly  to  tax  at  id.  in  the  pound,  calculated  upon  the  price 
which  the  mining  rights  might  be  expected  to  realise  if  sold  in 
open  market  at  the  date  of  valuation.  The  tax  on  undeveloped 
land  will  be  charged  upon  unbuilt-on  land  only,  and  ...  all  land 
having  a  purely  agricultural  value  will  be  exempt. 

Further  exemptions  will  be  made  in  favour  of  gardens  and 
pleasure  grounds  not  exceeding  an  acre  in  extent,  and  parks, 
gardens,  and  open  spaces  which  are  open  to  the  public  as  of  right, 
or  to  which  reasonable  access  is  granted  to  the  public,  where  that 
access  is  recognised  by  the  Commissioners  of  Inland  Revenue  as 
contributing  to  the  amenity  of  the  locality.  Where  undeveloped 
land  forms  part  of  a  settled  estate,  provision  will  be  made  to  enable 
a  limited  owner  who  has  not  the  full  enjoyment  of  the  land  to 
charge  the  duty  upon  the  corpus  of  the  property.  The  valuation 
upon  which  the  tax  will  be  charged  will  be  the  value  of  land  as  a 
cleared  site.   .   .  . 

Reversion  Duty 

My  third  proposal  under  the  head  of  land  is  a  lo  per  cent 
reversion  duty  upon  any  benefit  accruing  to  a  lessor  from  the 
determination  of  a  lease,  the  value  of  the  benefit  to  be  taken  to 
be  the  amount  (if  any)  by  which  the  total  value  of  the  land  at  the 
time  the  lease  falls  in  exceeds  the  value  of  the  consideration  for 
the  grant  of  the  lease,  due  regard  being  had,  however,  for  the  case 
of  the  reversioner  whose  interest  is  less  than  a  freehold,  .  •  , 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         379 

Valuation  of  Real  Propetiy 

These  proposals  necessarily  involve  a  complete  reconstruction 
of  the  method  of  valuing  property.  The  existing  taxes  upon  real 
property  are  levied  upon  the  annual  value  of  such  property  as 
a  whole  without  distinguishing  between  the  value  which  resides 
in  the  land  itself  and  that  which  has  been  added  to  it  by  the 
enterprise  of  the  owner  in  erecting  buildings  or  effecting  other 
improvements.  ... 

Indirect  Taxation 

I  am  not  going  at  this  late  hour  to  enter  into  any  discussion 
of  the  principles  which  ought  to  guide  a  Finance  Minister  in  the 
imposition  of  indirect  taxation.  But  one  thing  I  am  sure  will  be 
accepted  by  every  Member  of  this  House,  and  that  is  that  we 
ought  at  any  rate  to  avoid  taxes  on  the  necessaries  of  life.  I  re- 
ferred some  time  ago,  in  the  course  of  a  discussion  in  this  House, 
to  the  old  age  pension  officers'  reports.  There  was  one  thing  in 
those  reports  which  struck  me  very  forcibly,  and  that  was  that 
they  all  reported  that  the  poorer  the  people  they  had  to  deal  with, 
the  more  was  their  food  confined  to  bread  and  tea,  and  of  the 
price  of  that  tea,  which  of  course  was  of  the  poorest  quality,  half 
goes  to  the  tax  gatherer.  That  is  always  the  worst  of  indirect  taxa- 
tion on  the  people.  The  poorer  they  are  the  more  heavily  the  tax 
falls  upon  them.  Tea  and  sugar  are  necessaries  of  life,  and  I  think 
that  the  rich  man  who  would  wish  to  spare  his  own  pocket  at  the 
expense  of  the  bare  pockets  of  the  poor  is  a  very  shabby  rich  man 
indeed,  and  therefore  I  am  sure  that  I  carry  with  me  the  assent 
of  even  the  classes  upon  whom  I  am  putting  ver}^  heavy  burdens, 
that  when  we  come  to  indirect  taxes,  at  any  rate  those  two  essen- 
tials of  life  ought  to  be  exempt. 

There  are  three  other  possible  sources  —  beer,  spirits,  and  to- 
bacco. .  .  .  [No  increase  on  beer,  but  an  estimated  amount  of 
^1,600,000  to  be  raised  by  increased  taxes  on  spirits.]   .  ,  . 


38o  liRiriSII    SOCIAL   POLITICS 

Increase  of  Tobacco  Duty 

I  have  still  nearly  two  millions  more  to  find,  and  for  this  I  must 
turn  to  tobacco  —  from  a  fiscal  point  of  view,  a  much  healthier 
source  of  revenue.  The  present  rate  of  duty  on  unmanufactured 
tobacco  containing  lo  per  cent  or  more  of  moisture  is  3s.  a  pound, 
with  equivalent  additions  to  the  rates  for  cigars,  cigarettes,  and 
manufactured  tobacco.  .  .  . 

Conclusion 

I  have  to  thank  the  House  for  the  very  great  indulgence  which 
they  have  extended  to  me  and  for  the  patience  with  which  they 
have  listened  to  me.  My  task  has  been  an  extraordinarily  difficult 
one.  It  has  been  as  disagreeable  a  task  as  could  well  have  been 
allotted  to  any  Minister  of  the  Crown.  But  there  is  one  element 
of  supreme  satisfaction  in  it.  That  is  to  be  found  in  contemplating 
the  objects  for  which  these  new  imposts  have  been  created.  The 
money  thus  raised  is  to  be  expended  first  of  all  in  insuring  the 
inviolability  of  our  shores.  It  has  also  been  raised  in  order  not 
merely  to  relieve  but  to  prevent  unmerited  distress  within  those 
shores.  It  is  essential  that  we  should  make  every  necessary  pro- 
vision for  the  defence  of  our  country.  But  surely  it  is  equally 
imperative  that  we  should  make  it  a  country  eVen  better  worth  de- 
fending for  all  and  by  all.  And  it  is  the  fact  that  this  expenditure 
is  for  both  those  purposes  that  alone  could  justify  the  Government. 
I  am  told  that  no  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  has  ever  been  called 
on  to  impose  such  heavy  taxes  in  a  time  of  peace.  This,  Mr.  Em- 
mott,  is  a  War  Budget.  It  is  for  raising  money  to  wage  implacable 
warfare  against  poverty  and  squalidness.  I  cannot  help  hoping  and 
believing  that  before  this  generation  has  passed  away  we  shall  have 
advanced  a  great  step  towards  that  good  time  when  poverty  and 
wretchedness  and  human  degradation  which  always  follow  in  its 
camp  will  be  as  remote  to  the  people  of  this  country  as  the  wolves 
which  once  infested  its  forests. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET  38 1 

A   SOCIALIST'S   VIEW   OF   THE   BUDGET 

{Mr.  riiilip  Sji02U(fi'/!,  Coininoiis^  A'ovcuibcr  2,  iQog) 

Mr.  Snowden  ^ :  .  .  .  I  have  followed,  as  far  as  I  have  been 
able,  the  speeches  and  arguments  advanced  in  the  country  in  oppo- 
sition to  these  proposals,  and,  so  far  as  I  can  judge,  there  have 
been  not  many  objections  but  only  one  objection  to  this  Bill,  and 
that  one  has  been  that  the  Bill  is  Socialism,  or,  in  the  words  of 
Lord  Rosebery,  it  "  is  the  end  of  all  things  —  religion,  property, 
and  family  life."  .  .  .  Now,  I  shall  confine  my  remarks  to  dealing 
with  the  objection  that  this  Budget  Bill  is  Socialism.  I  may  begin  by 
attempting  to  define  what  we,  who  profess  to  be  Socialists,  mean 
by  Socialism.  The  Attorney-General  was  right  in  saying  that  So- 
cialism means  State  action,  but  that  is  not  exactly  the  definition  of 
Socialism  which  was  given  by  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  the  Leader 
of  the  Opposition  at  Birmingham  about  twelve  months  ago.  ff  I 
may  be  permitted  I  will  read  the  right  hon.  Gentleman's  words, 
because  they  admirably  serve  my  purpose.  The  Leader  of  the 
Opposition  —  speaking,  I  believe,  at  the  opening  of  that  curious 
anachronism,  a  Tory  labour  club,  about  twelve  months  ago,  a  club 
which  I  believe  has  since  found  its  way  into  the  Bankruptcy  Court 
—  gave  this  as  his  definition  of  Socialism : 

It  seems  to  me  there  is  no  difficulty  or  ambiguity  about  the  subject  at 
all.  Socialism  has  one  meaning,  and  one  meaning  only.  Socialism  means, 
and  can  mean  nothing  else,  that  the  community  or  the  .State  is  to  take  all 
the  means  of  production  into  its  own  hands,  that  private  enterprise  and 
private  property  are  to  come  to  an  end,  and  all  that  private  enterprise  and 
private  property  carry  with  them.  That  is  Socialism,  and  nothing  else  is 
Socialism.    Social  reform  — 

and  I  ask  here  the  attention  of  the  House  to  the  distincti(~)n  which 

the  right  hon.  Gentleman  attempted  to  draw  between   Socialism 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  12,  col   16S1  sqq. 


382  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

and  Social  Reform  —  I  shall,  later  on,  endeavour  to  show  that 
there  is  really  no  distinction  where  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  at- 
tempts to  establish  it.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  goes  on  to  draw 
a  distinction  between  Socialism  and  Social  Reform,  and  he  says : 

Social  reform  is  when  the  State,  based  upon  private  enterprise,  recog- 
nising that  the  best  productive  results  can  only  be  obtained  by  respect  of 
private  property  and  encouraging  private  enterprise,  asks  them  to  con- 
tribute towards  great  national,  social,  and  public  objects.  That  is  social 
reform. 

I  accepted  the  statement  made  by  the  Attorney-General  that 
Socialism  is  State  action.  But  it  is  something  more  than  that.  It 
yis  State  ownership  of  the  means  of  producing  and  distributing 
^  wealth.  There  may  be  State  action  which  is  not  connected  with 
the  ownership,  control,  and  management  of  industry.  We  as  Social- 
ists recognise  that.  We  recognise,  too,  the  existence  of  conditions 
which  everybody  deplores,  and  we  recognise  further  that  the  cause 
of  those  conditions  is  to  be  found  in  the  monopoly  of  the  means 
of  production  and  distribution  —  at  any  rate  in  the  monopoly  of 
land  and  capital.  Our  purpose  is  to  substitute  for  private  owner- 
ship of  land  and  capital  public  ownership  and  control  of  both.  But 
/that  is  not  a  thing  which  can  be  accomplished  at  once.  We  realise 
that.  Meanwhile  we  are  anxious  to  do  something  towards  bringing 
it  about.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  defines  Socialism  as  the  State 
ownership  of  the  means  of  producing  and  distributing  wealth.  May 
I  say  I  do  not  accept  that  ?  The  definition  by  Socialists  of  Socialism 
is  not  the  State  ownership  of  land  and  capital.  That  is  only  a  con- 
dition of  Socialism  or  a  means  of  Socialism.  Socialism  means  that 
all  socially  created  wealth  shall  be  owned  by  the  community,  and 
that  its  distribution  shall  be  directed  by  the  community  for  the  good 
of  the  community.  The  national  ownership  of  land  and  capital  is 
a  necessary  condition  to  attaining  a  state  of  things  like  that.  We 
recognise  that  we  cannot  reach  our  goal  under  the  present  system 
and  at  once,  and  we  are  anxious,  therefore,  in  the  meantime,  to 
divert  as  much  as  we  can,  and  as  rapidly  as  we  can,  socially  created 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         383 

wealth  for  the  purpose  of  dealing  with  industrial  and  social  evils 
which  are  the  result  of  the  private  ownership  of  land  and  capital. 
Therefore,  although  the  taxation  of  socially  created  wealth  may  not ' 
be  Socialism  in  itself,  it  is  a  step' towards  Socialism,  and  therefore, 
in  so  far  as  this  Budget  taxes  socially  created  wealth  for  social  pur- 
poses, it  is  Socialistict   But  it  is  not  Socialism.        [/ 

low  I  come  to  the  point  whether  there  is  anything  new  or  novel 
in  the  proposals  of  this  Budget.  The  Attorney-General,  no  doubt, 
described  certain  proposals  as  being  novel,  but  I  have  not  been 
able  to  discover  any  novelty  whatever  in  any  one  of  the  proposals 
of  the  Finance  Bill.  To  my  mind  there  is  nothing  new  in  it.  It 
is  too  late  in  the  day  to  begin  to  talk  about  the,  beginning  of  So- 
cialism ;  as  a  matter  of  fact  we  are  well  on  the  road  to  Socialism,- 
and  all  the  legislation  of  the  nineteenth  century  has  been  nothing 
more  or  less  than  an  effort  on  the  part  of  this  House  to  deal  with 
the  evils  resulting  from  the  private  ownership  of  land  and  capital. 
Throughout  the  whole  of  the  nineteenth  century  we  have  been 
moving  in  our  legislation  towards  Socialism  —  first  of  all  by  con- 
stantly increasing  legal  restrictions  in  the  free  and  individual  use 
of  land  and  capital.  Our  public  health  legislation  is  an  illustration 
of  that.  If  you  require  further  illustration  there  is  the  Factory 
legislation.  There  is  no  difference  whatever  in  the  economic  effect 
upon  private  monopoly  of  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act  and 
the  factory  legislation  and  public  health  legislation,  and  the  direct 
taxation  upon  the  profits  on  monopoly  which  has  been  acted  upon 
by  all  parties  in  the  State. 

The  second  way  in  which  we  are  moving  towards  Socialism  has 
been  the  gradual  supplementing  of  private  voluntary  charities  by 
public  organisations  for  dealing  with  the  poorest  parts  of  our  popu- 
lation. That  is  accepted  by  the  party  opposite  and,  indeed,  by  every 
party  in  the  House,  and  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act  is  an  illustration 
of  that.  Then  we  have  been  trying  to  raise  the  condition  of  the 
poorest  part  of  the  population  by  such  measures  as  the  Education 
Act.    What  makes  a  measure  of  that  kind  all  the  more  Socialistic 


384  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

is  that  to  a  ver^'  great  extent  it  is  provided  for  by  taxation  on 
socially  created  wealth. 

The  third  way  in  which  we  have  moved  towards  Socialism  is  on 
the  lines  of  the  proposals  of  this  Bill  by  constantly  increasing  the 
taxation  on  rent,  interest,  and  profits  for  the  purpose  of  dealing 
with  the  results  of  the  private  ownership  of  land.  Your  Income 
Tax  is  an  illustration  of  that. 

The  fourth  way,  and  the  most  Socialistic  of  all,  is  the  gradual 
supplanting  of  private  enterprise  and  private  institutions  by  pub- 
lic initiative  and  public  organisations.  You  have  that  illustrated 
in  our  magnificent  and  highly  successful  municipal  and  State 
undertakings. 

Now,  one  of  the  four  ways  in  which  we  have  been  moving 
towards  Socialism  is  by  increasing  taxation  upon  rent,  interest,  and 
profits,  which  are  recognised  even  by  the  right  hon.  Gentleman 
himself  as  being  Socialistically  created.  Is  there  anything  novel  in 
any  one  of  these  things  ?  \\'hat  are  Land  Taxes  ?  Land  taxation 
simply  proposes  to  tax  socially  created  wealth  for  social  purposes. 
That  is  nothing  new.  It  is  one  of  the  difficulties  of  attempting  to 
apply  a  principle  partially.  If  you  attempt  so  to  apply  a  principle, 
you  are  certain  to  create  an  apparent  injustice.  I  have  a  certain 
amount  of  sympathy  with  those  who  urge  that  it  is  not  fair  to  dis- 
criminate between  social  increment  on  land  and  social  increment  in 
other  forms.  That  is  an  objection  which  cannot  be  urged  against 
Socialism.  It  can  be  urged  only  against  hon.  Gentlemen  opposite 
who  do  draw  a  distinct  line  about  land  and  capital.  We  do  not 
make  any  such  distinction,  and  it  must  be  recognised  that  we  are 
not  in  a  position  to  put  our  ideas  in  a  Finance  Bill.  We  have  to 
take  what  we  can  get,  but  if  we  had  the  power  of  saying  in  what 
way  the  revenue  of  the  country  is  to  be  raised,  I  am  quite  certain 
no  Socialist  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  would  distinguish  between 
social  increment  of  land  and  social  increment  in  regard  to  the  taxes 
which  would  ordinarily  fall  upon  the  communit)'. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         385 

We  support  the  land  taxation  proposals,  not  because  we  think 
they  do  everything  or  go  far  enough  —  we  support  them  because- 
they  are  as  much  as  we  can  get  at  present,  but  when  a  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  comes  forward  to  propose  and  apply  taxation  of 
unearned  increment  to  any  other  form  of  property,  he  will  find  that 
we  shall  be  quite  as  hearty  in  our  support  as  we  are  in  the  sup- 
port which  we  have  given  to  the  Land  Taxes  in  the  Budget.  In 
regard  to  the  Income  Tax  proposals,  I  remember  the  right  hon. 
Gentleman  himself  in  Committee  when  we  began  to  discuss  the 
Income  Tax  part  of  the  Bill  expressed  his  relief  that  at  last  we 
were  coming  to  legitimate  finance.  What  is  Income  Tax  ?  It  is 
the  taxation  of  socially  created  wealth,  and  the  fact  that  the  Gov- 
ernment are  imposing  in  this  Finance  Bill  a  Super-tax  is  nothing 
new.  ^t  is  only  a  further  graduation  of  the  Income  Tax.  The 
graduation  below  ^700  was,  of  course,  adopted  in  order  very 
roughly  to  make  a  man  contribute  more  because  of  his  greater 
capacity,  and  the  Super-tax  is  nothing  more  than  an  extension  of 
this  principle.   .   .   . 

There  is  nothing  new  or  novel  in  the  proposals  of  this  Bill.  The 
Income  Tax  is  not  novel,  the  Land  Taxes  are  not  novel,  the  Estate 
Duties  are  certainly  not  novel.  It  is  Socialistic  in  part,  but  it  is  not 
Socialistic  in  other  parts.  I  have  already  referred  to  the  Tobacco 
Duty.  That  is  not  Socialistic  because  the  Tobacco  Tax  is  indirect 
taxation,  it  is  not  taxation  on  social  wealth,  and  it  is  taking  from 
a  very  needy  class  of  the  community  a  great  deal  more  than  they 
can  afford  to  pay. 

We  do  not  expect  to  have,  of  course,  a  measure  which  is  con- 
sistently Socialistic  from  men  who  are  not  Socialists.  Eor  a  long 
time  to  come  we  expect  that  the  legislation  which  will  be  intro- 
duced even  by  a  Government  anxious  to  promote  reform  will  be 
of  an  inconsistent  character.  It  will  be  Socialistic  partly  and  anti- 
Socialistic  in  its  other  parts.  This  Budget  is  neither  complete  So- 
cialism nor  is  it  revolution.    Why,  it  is  such  a  slight  movement  of 


386  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  wheel  as  to  be  hardly  perceptible,  and  I  will  tell  hon.  Mem- 
bers above  the  gangway  what  it  is:  It  is  a  preventive  of  revolu-''^ 
tion.  What  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  calls  social  reform  is  only 
a  preventive  of  revolution,  l^o  hon.  Members  above  the  gangway 
think  that  such  a  state  of  things  as  exists  in  this  country  to-day 
can  be  indefinitely  prolonged  ?  We  have  had  forty  years  of  ele- 
mentary education.  The  masses  of  the  people  have  been  taught 
to  read.  Reading  has  made  them  think,  has  made  them  feel  more- 
acutely.  They  are  not  going  to  be  content  forever  to  be  hewers 
of  wood  and  drawers  of  water.  The  unemployed  are  not  going  to 
continue  to  walk  the  streets  of  our  great  cities  and  see  their  de- 
spair and  poverty  mocked  by  the  evidences  before  their  eyes  of 
ostentatious  wealth.  Something  is  going  to  be  done  by  this  Par- 
liament to  remove  these  great  inequalities  of  poverty  and  wealth, 
ignorance  and  culture,  want  and  luxury,  and  we  welcome  this  Bill 
because  it  is  a  very  moderate  beginning  to  deal  with  questions  like 
that.  We  welcome  the  proposals  to  which  I  have  referred,  because 
they  begin  to  apply,  in  a  small  way,  proposals  which  we  on  these 
benches  have  been  asserting  for  many  years.  We  shall  support 
the  third  reading  of  this   Bill. 

I  have  only  one  word  more  to  say.    I  want  to  refer  to  the  alter- 
native which  was  put  forward  by  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  who 
moved  the  rejection  of  the  Bill.     I  said  at  the  beginning  of  my 
remarks  that  we  who  are  Socialists  are  opposed  to  Tariff  Reform.  — 
We  are  sometimes  told  by  hon.  Members  that  we  are  inconsistent 
in  being  Trade  Unionists  for  the  protection  of  our  trades  and  in 
opposing  a  duty  on  articles  coming  from  foreign  countries.    There 
is  nothing  inconsistent  in  that.    I  will  tell  why  we  are  opposed  to 
Protection  in  the  way  of  import  duties.    So  long  as  you  have  a 
monopoly  of  land  and  of  capital  any  import  duty  can  only  have 
one  result,  and  that  result  is  to  increase  the  rent  of  the  landlord  or  ^-^ 
to  increase  the  property  of  the  capitalist.    It  cannot  possibly  bene-  ^ — 
fit  the  workman.    Where  you  have  competition  in  employment  there 
is  always  a  tendency  for  wages  to  be  forced  down,  and  competition 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         387 

will  prevent  the  wages  rising,  and  no  system  of  reform,  as  long 
as  you  have  a  monopoly  of  land  and  capital,  can,  under  such  a 
system,  be  depended  upon  to  benefit  the  working  classes. 

An  hon.  Member  talked  of  taxing  the  foreigner.  There  have 
been  in  the  last  two  or  three  months  elections  in  Germany ;  those 
elections  have  been  fought  almost  exclusively  upon  the  question 
of  taxation.  The  Socialists  to  a  man  in  Germany  are  opposed  to 
taxation  on  imports.  They  are  Free  Traders,  and  they  are  op- 
posed to  Protection  because  of  their  painful  experience  of  it.  May 
I  put  this  question,  and  possibly  some  Member  who  follows  me 
may  deal  with  it?  If  it  is  possible  to  raise  a  revenue  by  taxing 
the  foreigner,  why  did  not  Germany  during  this  year  adopt  the 
practice  of  taxing  the  foreigner  ?  It  required  to  raise  something 
like  ;^26,ooo,ooo  of  taxation,  and  every  penny  of  it  has  been 
raised  by  internal  taxation.  No,  if  I  cared  to  give  candid  advice 
and  useful  information  to  hon.  Members  above  the  gangway  in 
view  of  the  propaganda  work  which  it  will  be  necessary  to  do 
during  an  election  campaign,  I  would  say  to  them,  "  Do  not  talk 
to  the  workingmen  of  this  country  nonsense  like  that.  You  are 
depreciating  their  intelligence,  you  are  insulting  them,  you  are  not 
playing  the  game  of  politics  to  your  own  advantage."  I  know  the 
working  people  of  this  country,  I  belong  to  them,  I  have  lived  with 
them,  and  I  know  their  capacity  of  thinking.  I  know  their  capacity 
of  reason,  and  why  I  have  faith  in  them  is  because  of  it.  I  think 
if  you  appeal  to  that  intelligence  it  will  respond.  For  these  reasons 
we  are  going  to  support  the  third  reading  of  this  Bill,  which  will 
leave  this  House  in  two  or  three  days  backed  up  by  an  over- 
whelming vote.  What  will  happen  in  another  place  I  do  not  know, 
but  if  the  worst  comes  to  the  worst,  and  if  it  be  necessary  that  we 
should  go  to  the  country  on  this  question,  I  can  assure  the  Gov- 
ernment that  those  who  sit  on  these  benches  and  the  party  which 
we  represent  outside  will  not  be  amongst  the  least  of  the  earnest 
and  enthusiastic  supporters  of  that  part  of  the  Bill  which  I  com- 
mend to  the  House. 


388  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  60 

ECCLESIASTICAL  OPPOSITION  TO  THE  BUDGET 

(^Bishop  of  Bristol,  Lords,  N^oveniber  22,  iQog) 

The  Lord  Bishop  of  Bristol  ^ :  .  .  .  I  have  been  told  that  a 
Bishop  should  not  take  part  in  this  debate,  because  the  question  is 
one  of  mere  party  strife.  If  it  were,  I  should  certainly  not  think  of 
taking  any  part  in  it.  But  it  is  very  much  more  than  that.  We  are 
told  that  the  fortunes  of  this  House,  and  the  fortunes  of  the  nation 
and  of  the  people  depend  upon  the  issue.  If  that  be  so,  there  is  no 
body  of  men  in  this  House  more  called  upon  to  take  part  in  a 
debate  of  this  kind  — if  the  fortunes  of  the  House  depend  upon  the 
issue  of  this  debate — than  the  occupants  of  the  Episcopal  Benches. 
For  we  are  the  only  representatives  of  the  ancient  constitutional 
method  of  entry  into  this  House,  namely,  that  of  careful  selection 
on  the  part  of  the  Sovereign  and  of  all  the  people  to  a  certain 
office  involving  a  seat  in  the  House  of  Lords.  Careful  selection  by 
the  King  goes  on  still,  and  by  all  the  people,  because  the  appointed 
representative  of  all  the  people  is  the  Prime  Minister.  We,  there- 
fore, are  the  only  body  which  keep  up  the  ancient  practice.  Further 
than  that,  we  represent  a  very  much  older  tenure  than  that  of  the 
oldest  physical  hereditary  Peer  in  this  House.  The  earliest  tenure 
that  I  can  trace  of  physical  heredity  is  754  years  old,  and  admirably 
that  Earldom  is  filled  to-day.  But  there  are  three  persons  actually 
sitting  on  these  Benches  now  whose  tenure  is  550  years  older  than 
that,  and  there  are  no  fewer  than  ten  other  members  on  these 
Benches  whose  tenure  is  from  450  to  550  years  older  than  the  old- 
est of  the  physical  hereditary  Peers,  we  ha\yng  a  spiritual  heredity. 
I  maintain,  therefore,  that  if  there  is  any  question  of  the  honour 
of  this  House,  from  these  Benches  at  least  some  words  should 
come  in  support  of  this  House.  .  .   . 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  767-768. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         389 

.  .  .  All  of  your  Lordships  know  a  great  deal  about  the  condition 
of  the  poorest  classes  in  society,  from  what  you  call  the  lowest  to 
what  may  be  called  the  highest  in  the  social  scale.  As  a  matter  of 
fact  it  is  not  the  business  of  any  one  of  your  Lordships^  except  those 
of  us  here  on  these  [Episcopal]  Benches,  to  know,  and  to  know  inti- 
mately, not  the  conditions  only,  but  the  persons  of  all  classes  in  the 
social  scale  in  our  respective  dioceses ;  and  I  claim  that  there  are  no 
men  sitting  in  this  House  who  know  so  completely,  from  one  end 
of  the  social  scale  to  the  other,  the  conditions,  the  needs,  the  wants, 
and  the  demands  of  every  class  of  the  community  as  we  do.  We 
are  obliged  to  know,  especially  those  of  us  who  represent  a  great 
city,  as  I  do,  the  terrible  conditions  of  the  very  poor.  We  are 
obliged  to  know  the  great  want  of  employment  that  affects  men 
who  can  do  excellent  work.  We  are  obliged  to  know  the  conditions 
of  the  artisan,  of  the  shopkeeper,  and  of  the  professional  classes, 
and  even  higher  than  that.  Many  of  us  have  to  know  the  condition 
of  the  very  great  capitalists  who  perhaps  farm  a  little  for  their  own 
amusement,  but  who  have  the  whole  of  their  income  to  spend  ;  and 
we  know,  and  know  intimately,  some  large  landowners  who,  far 
from  having  the  whole  of  their  income  to  spend,  have  a  very  narrow 
margin  indeed.  All  this  we  have  to  know  intimately  as  our  official 
business ;  and  although  the  noble  and  learned  Lord  took  credit  to 
the  Government  for  having  passed  certain  ameliorating  measures, 
I  suppose  it  was  this  House  that  passed  them.  And  it  will  always 
be  so  —  when  direct  measures  for  the  benefit  of  the  very  poor 
are  brought  forward,  this  House  will  give  them  no  niggardly 
support.   .   .   . 

...  I  see  the  ultimate  result  of  these  proposals  now  brought  be- 
fore us  :  a  dull  monotonous  level  of  poverty  without  any  redeeming 
points  at  all.  We  all  of  us  know  the  familiar  joke  with  regard  to 
persons  on  a  certain  island  who  had  to  employ  one  another.  They 
had  no  money  to  pay  each  other,  and  the  old  joke  was  that  they 
could  live  only  by  taking  in  each  other's  washing.  But,  my  Lords, 
there  is  another  and  a  very  serious  point.    Some  twenty  of  us  on 


390  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

these  Benches  have  the  privilege  of  reading  prayers  in  your  Lord- 
ships' House,  and  the  culminating  point  in  the  special  Prayer  for 
Parliament  which  so  many  of  your  Lordships  heard  this  evening 
is  this :  the  result  of  your  deliberations  is  to  be  "  the  uniting  and 
knitting  together  of  the  hearts  of  all  persons  and  estates  within  the 
realm  in  true  Christian  love  and  charity  one  towards  the  other." 

That  is  to  be  the  culminating  effect  of  the  deliberations  and  the 
legislation  of  this  House.  Some  of  us  are  accustomed,  when  we 
are  considering  a  proposal,  to  ask  ourselves  what  is  the  exact  argu- 
ment which  the  author  of  the  proposal  thinks  most  cognate  to  it, 
and  thinks  best  as  a  means  of  urging  it  upon  the  attention  of  the 
people.  Now,  my  Lords,  we  know  who  is  the  official  author  of  this 
Bill.  Not  to  say  a  word  about  his  Parliamentary  utterances,  I  only 
ask  your  Lordships  to  consider  his  speeches  out  of  Parliament,  and 
particularly  one  delivered  near  my  old  charge  when  I  was  in  Step- 
ney —  made  in  certain  language  and  with  evident  motive.  If  the 
intention  of  this  Bill  is  to  be  judged,  as  I  maintain  it  may  fairly  be 
judged,  by  the  expressions  of  its  author  in  pressing  it  upon  public 
attention,  well,  there  is  nothing  in  the  world  for  this  House  to  do 
but  to  pass  the  Amendment  of  the  noble  Marquess  [rejecting  the 
Bill].  .... 


Extract  6i 

A  LIBERAL  LORD'S  OPINION  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL 
OPPOSITION 

{Lofd  SJicffield,  Lords,  November  22,  igog) 

Lord  Sheffield  ^ :  My  Lords,  I  was  not  quite  able  to  follow 
the  argument  of  the  right  rev.  Prelate,  though  I  followed  his  con- 
clusion that  he  meant  to  vote  for  throwing  out  the  Budget.  The 
right  rev.  Prelate  not  only  claimed  an  antiquated  tenure,  but  said 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  770  sqq. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        391 

he  descended  from  a  spiritual  tenure,  and  not  from  an  earthly  one. 
He  also  made  the  declaration  that  he  and  his  brother  Prelates  knew 
more  about  the  conditions  of  all  classes  of  the  community,  cared 
more  about  them,  and  generally  had  a  more  earnest  desire  to  bene- 
fit them  than  anyone  else.  It  seems  disrespectful  to  put  anything 
like  a  note  of  interrogation  to  any  of  his  statements.   .   .   . 

If  I  could  examine  the  history  of  the  right  rev.  Bench  and  note 
their  attitude  towards  the  innumerable  cases  of  progressive  legisla- 
tion urged  upon  Parliament  during  the  last  one  hundred  years  —  if 
they  knew  all  this,  they  dissembled  their  love  very  successfully.  I  am 
glad,  however,  that  there  is  a  desire  to  act  upon  the  words  in  the 
prayer  spoken  of  by  the  right  rev.  Prelate,  and  to  work  for  the 
whole  nation.  I  only  wish  the  right  rev.  Prelate  would  remember 
some  other  weighty  and  valuable  words  in  that  prayer — "to  put 
aside  all  partial  affection." 

I  think  if  there  is  one  thing  we  need  more  than  another,  it  is  that 
we  should  clear  ourselves  from  association  with  class,  from  profes- 
sions, from  all  those  things  that  prevent  us  from  having  that  high 
light  which  is  so  important  if  we  want  to  deal  with  intellectual  and 
social  problems.  And  I  cannot  help  thinking  that  the  right  rev. 
Prelate  did  not  seem  to  bring  quite  that  high  light  into  the  matter 
in  considering  how  he  proposed  to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  the 
poor  which  he  said,  from  his  knowledge  of  Bristol  and  Stepney,  it 
was  his  desire  to  do.  We  have  had  to-night  from  all  three  speakers, 
who  have  spoken  from  the  Opposition  side,  a  great  deal  of  abuse 
of  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  We  know  it  is  a  good  maxim 
"  when  you  have  no  case,  abuse  the  plaintiff's  attorney."  And  it 
seems  to  me  that  that  is  very  much  the  way  this  Budget  is  being 
treated.  I  think  anyone  would  be  very  sorry  to  have  to  defend  all 
the  speeches  of  his  friends  or  political  associates  at  any  time.  We 
could  get  plenty  of  stones  to  throw  at  each  other,  and  I  expect  we 
shall  have  an  ample  supply  of  these  missiles  furnished  to  us  from 
both  sides  in  a  very  short  time. 


392  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  62 

AN  ATTACK  UPON  THE  SPONSOR  OF  THE  BILL 

[Lord  IVilloiighby  de  Broke,  Lords,  iVovef/iber  22,  igog) 

Lord  Willoughby  de  Broke  ^ :  .  .  .  The  Government  can- 
not remain  in  ofifice  except  by  the  consent  of  the  Socialists  and  the 
extreme  Radicals  ;  and  this  proposal  about  the  unearned  increment 
they  believe,  will,  in  a  very  short  time,  be  applied  to  all  forms  of 
property.  All  this  sort  of  thing  is  bound  eventually  to  filter  down 
to  the  working  classes  of  this  country.  The  form  of  taxation  recom- 
mended by  the  Radical  party  will  very  soon  resolve  itself  into  this 
sort  of  thing  with  regard  to  unearned  increment.  When  any  citizen 
happens,  in  vulgar  parlance,  to  "  make  a  hit"  by  his  own  energy  or 
thrift  or  good  luck,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  will  step  in, 
and  having  labelled  him  a  "  blackmailer"  or  a  "  swindler,"  he  will  not 
put  an  end  to  the  transaction,  but  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer 
will  then  go  shares  in  the  plunder.  Yes,  but  what  for .-'  To  provide 
a  revenue  for  Old  Age  Pensions  or  something  of  that  sort  would 
be  the  reply.  But  I  think  you  will  find  it  will  eventually  be  applied 
to  advancing  the  schemes  of  this  or  that  body,  whether  Socialists 
or  somebody  else,  probably  equally  as  bad,  whom  it  may  be  desir- 
able to  placate  in  order  to  keep  the  Government  in  office  as  long  as 
they  possibly  can.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  workingmen  of  this 
country  are  beginning  to  have  a  very  uncomfortable  feeling  that  the 
rhetoric  of  Mr.  Lloyd  George  and  the  vulgarity  of  the  President  of 
the  Board  of  Trade  will  not  fill  many  empty  stomachs  or  replenish 
many  bare  cupboards  during  the  coming  winter.  And  they  will  not 
see  the  advantage  of  paying  a  whole  horde  of  officials  to  pry  into  the 
public  life  of  everybody  in  this  country,  and  who  will  be  paid  from 
money  taken  from  the  beer  and  the  spirits  and  the  tobacco  con- 
sumed by  the  workingmen.    I  may  mention  that  the  taxation  on 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  I'ifth  Scries,  vol.  4,  col.  7S0-7S1. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         393 

champagne  is  not  increased  at  all.  The  luxuries  of  the  rich  men 
contribute  hardly  anything  towards  the  taxation  of  this  country.  .  .  . 

Then  we  are  told  that  we  are  violating  and  overriding  the  will 
of  the  people.  All  this  talk  about  the  voice  of  the  people  is  cant. 
It  is  real  cant  of  the  purest  description.  It  is  an  utterly  meaningless 
phrase,  and  is  merely  part  of  the  stock-in-trade  of  the  agitator  and 
of  the  demagogue.  The  will  of  the  people  is  not  expressed  on  this 
subject  at  this  moment  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Representative 
government  in  this  country  is  at  an  absurd  discount,  and  the  talk 
about  representative  government  and  free  institutions  has  now  re- 
sulted in  this  sort  of  thing :  that  we  are  the  only  Government  in 
the  whole  of  the  civilised  world  that  is  not  being  dominated  and 
controlled  by  a  small  section  of  Socialists.  With  regard  to  the 
will  of  the  people,  I,  for  one,  have  not  the  slightest  anxiety  about 
referring  this  Budget  to  the  people. 

What  most  moderate  men  are  asking  us  to  do  is  to  save  them 
from  being  jockeyed  and  bullied  and  bluffed  by  the  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer  and  the  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade  into  accept- 
ing a  Budget  and  a  policy  for  which  there  was  not  the  slightest 
mandate  at  the  last  General  Election.  If  your  Lordships  embrace 
this  policy,  then  I  can  only  say,  "  Heaven  help  England.''  The  late 
Mr.  Bromley-Davenport  wrote  an  extremely  amusing  parody  upon 
"  Locksley  Hall  "  which  has  been  described  by  a  ripe  critic  of  liter- 
ature as  one  of  the  finest  things  in  the  English  language.  I  hope 
it  will  not  be  considered  out  of  place  if  I  quote  something  from  it. 
He  was  endeavouring  to  foreshadow,  with  Tennyson,  the  state  of 
the  country  at  some  future  date,  when  he  wrote  these  lines : 

For  I  looked  into  its  pages,  and  I  read  tiie  Book  of  Fate, 

And  saw  foxhunting  abolished  by  an  order  from  the  State ; 

Saw  the  landlords  yield  their  acres  after  centuries  of  wrongs, 

Cotton  lords  turn  country  gentlemen  in  patriotic  throngs ; 

Queen,  religion.  State  abandoned,  and  the  flags  of  party  furled 

In  the  Government  of  Cobden  and  the  dotage  of  the  world. 

Then  shall  exiled  common  sense  espouse  some  other  country's  cause, 

And  the  rogues  shall  thrive  in  England,  bonneting  the  slumbering  laws. 


394  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  6j 

A  FINANCIER'S  VIEW  OF  THE  BUDGET 

(^Lord  Revehtoke,  Lords^  N'oveinber  22,  igog) 

Lord  Revelstoke  ^ :  .  .  .  It  has  been  my  lot  to  have  been 
brought  up  in  the  midst  of  financial  and  commercial  operations,  in 
the  conduct  and  consideration  of  which  I  have  endeavoured  to  follow 
the  traditions  and  to  be  guided  by  the  experience  of  many  genera- 
tions of  financiers  in  my  own  family,  whose  success  in  life  has  been 
due  to  their  intimate  connection  with  banking  and  commerce,  and 
whose  prosperity,  or  the  reverse,  has  for  many  years  been  bound 
up  with  the  financial  position  of  the  City  of  London,  the  home 
and  centre  of  that  great  system  of  "  credit "  upon  which  so  much 
depends.   .   .  . 

Here  is  a  Budget  which,  designed  to  meet  expenditure  for  great 
social  reforms,  places  an  accumulated  burden  of  higher  Income  Tax, 
Super-tax,  Death  Duties,  Land  Tax,  Stamp  Duties,  all  on  one  par- 
ticular class.  And  surely,  my  Lords,  in  this  matter  of  heaping  taxa- 
tion upon  the  few,  a  double  error  is  committed.    Not  only  is  there 

i  a  penalising  of  capital,  with  its  consequent  ill  effects  upon  the  whole 

community;  but  the  force  of  public  opinion  —  the  greatest,  if  not  the 

only  check  upon  extravagant  expenditure  —  is  weakened,  and  it  is 

weakened  at  the  moment  when  it  is  most  urgently  required.  .   .  . 

It  has  been  said,  and  said  many  times  within  recent  months,  that 

A  capital  is  leaving  this  country'  to  a  very  serious  extent,  and  I  have 
to  testify,  from  my  own  practical  knowledge,  that  this  is  true.  .  .  . 
This  is  a  new  doctrine  to  be  preached  by  a  British  Administra- 
tion. It  misrepresents  the  position  of  capital  as  it  is  understood 
by  all  impartial  observers  removed  from  the  clamour  of  party  poli- 
tics. It  ignores  the  extent  to  which  the  prosperity  of  this  nation  has 
been  due  to  its  great  capital  resources,  its  heritage  of  financial  su- 
premacy, its  unshaken  credit.   The  extreme  difficulty  of  adequately 

1  Parliamentary'  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  794  sqq. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        395 

conveying  to  the  originators  of  this  Bill  a  sense  of  the  harm  which 
it  has  already  occasioned,  and  is  likely  to  still  further  occasion,  lies 
largely  in  the  very  fact  that  it  seems  well-nigh  impossible  to  bring 
home  to  those  responsible  a  real  sense  of  what  is  involved  in 
"  unshaken  credit."  As  I  have  read  the  speeches  of  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  I  can  almost  hear  him  ask,  like  another  person 
better  known  in  history,  and,  like  him,  without  waiting  for  an  answer, 
not  "  What  is  truth  ?  "  but  "  What  is  credit  ?  "  My  Lords,  I  can 
give  him  that  answer  —  I  can  give  him  the  answer  he  would  receive 
from  the  sober  community  among  whom  I  have  passed  my  days. 
They  would  tell  him  —  and  they  are  men  whose  occupations  do 
not  lead  them  to  make  speeches,  but  who  have  read,  and  read  with 
dismay,  the  reckless  and  unconsidered  utterances  of  even  the  most 
responsible  members  of  His  Majesty's  Government.  Those  of 
whom  I  speak,  my  Lords,  are  men  whose  experience  and  char- 
acter, whose  probity  and  judgment,  have  contributed  not  a  little 
to  make  this  England  of  ours  what  she  has  been  —  and  what  she 
should  remain  —  the  Bank  and  the  workshop  of  the  world.  They 
would  tell  him,  my  Lords,  that  they  define  "  credit "  as  "  confi- 
dence." Confidence  in  financial  prudence,  confidence  in  ability  to 
pay,  confidence  in  financial  equity  and  stability,  confidence  in  the 
sanctity  of  property.  Can  we  say,  my  Lords,  that  our  confidence 
in  any  of  these  would  not  be  shaken  by  the  passing  of  the  measure 
which  is  now  before  your  Lordships'  House  ? 

Extract  64 

ECCLESIASTICAL  SUPPORT   OF   THE  BUDGET 

[Bishop  of  Binuiiighatn^  Lofds,  jYoi'ewber  22,  igog) 

The  Lord  Bishop  of   Birmingham  M  .   .  .    It  is  impossible 
to  live  in  our  great  cities  without  becoming  conscious  of  the  fact 
that  for  the  great  body  of  the  workers  our  country  is  not  a  good 
1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  799  sqq. 


396  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

'place  to  live  in  at  the  present  moment.  As  I  have  shown  your 
Lordships,  there  is  a  great,  vast,  and  growing  demand  for  money 
for  public  expenditure.  How  is  that  money  which  is  required  to 
be  obtained  ?  The  question  is  whether  in  this  Budget  there  is  an 
unjust  and  oppressive  treatment  of  particular  classes,  especially  of 
the  landed  classes  and  of  those  who  are  engaged  in  the  liquor 
trade.  I  do  not  know  whether  that  is  the  case.  With  regard  to 
the  matter  which  has  been,  I  suppose,  most  commented  on  of  all 
the  land  taxes  —  that  is,  the  tax  upon  the  unearned  increment  on 
land  in  and  about  towns  —  those  of  us  who  have  been  taught  the 
political  economy  of  John  Stuart  Mill  have  been  expecting  to  see 
this  tax  in  England  for  a  great  many  years.  .  .  . 

...  It  was  said  in  the  course  of  this  debate  before  dinner  that 
the  Budget  is  Socialism.  Of  course  you  can  use  the  terms  Con-  ^ 
servatism,  Liberalism,  and  Socialism  in  such  a  way  as  to  make 
them  apply  to  almost  everything  you  like.  Socialism  is  a  term 
which  I  think  it  is  best  to  employ  as  a  quite  distinctive  term,  rep- 
resenting a  quite  distinctive  view,  and  a  view  which  no  doubt  is 
gaining  in  its  hold  especially  on  the  working  classes  throughout 
Europe.  I  do  not  hold  with  the  Socialistic  theory  myself,  but  I 
know  what  it  means.  It  means  the  abolition  of  private  capital,  not 
private  property,  and  the  socialisation  of  the  sources  and  instru- 

\  ments  of  production  and  distribution.  In  the  sense  in  which  Col- 
-  lectivists  use  the  word  Socialism  this  Budget  is  not  in  any  way 
Socialistic.  It  does  not  propose  in  any  kind  of  way,  or  point  to, 
the  transfer  to  the  community  of  the  sources  and  instruments  of 
production  and  distribution,  although  it  might  be  said  that  it  moves 
towards  it.  I  venture  to  think  that  the  most  reactionary  Budget, 
the  Budget  which  moves  most  sharply  in  the  opposite  direction, 

^    would  be  the  Budget  which  would  be  most  likely  to  lead  rapidly  to 

^^  Socialism  by  stirring  up  the  already  moving  minds  of  the  people  to 

rebellion  and  revolt  against  the  injustice  of  our  present  conditions.  .  . . 

The  Budget  is  only  one  more  instance  of  the  gradual  growth 

towards  a  more  proper  distribution  of  the  constantly  increasing 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         397 

burdens  of  public  expenditure,  broadening  out  from  precedent  to 
precedent,  and  I  cannot  but  feel  that  your  Lordships  will  indeed 
not  be  acting  wisely  if  you  treat  this  Budget  as  if  it  could  be  ac- 
cused of  containing  either  revolutionary  or  unjust  principles. 


Extract  6^ 

A   CONCILIATORY   SPEECH   ON   THE   BUDGET 

{Lord  Ribblesdale^  Lords^  Nove7nber  22^  iQog) 

Lord  Ribblesdale  ^ :  .  .  .  My  Lords,  we  have  all  been  very 
much  upset  —  I  have  myself  • — •  by  the  speeches  of  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  but  I  have  been  able  to  get  over  them,  and  I 
have  no  doubt  noble  Lords  opposite  have  also.  But  there  is  one 
thing  I  will  say  for  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  and  that  is  that  he  has 
stuck  to  his  form  throughout.  If  you  take  Limehouse  as  his  Ossa, 
he  backed  it  up  with  Pelion  in  the  shape  of  Newcastle.  I  rather 
respect  him  for  that,  because  there  is  no  sort  of  doubt  that,  if  any 
speaker  starts  on  a  half-pantaloon  and  half-highwayman  style  it  is 
almost  too  much  to  ask  him,  all  of  a  sudden,  to  turn  around  and 
revert  to  the  manner  of  our  classical  models,  such  as  the  late  Mr. 
Gladstone,  the  late  Lord  Goschen,  and  the  present  Lord  St.  Aldwyn. 
But  whatever  may  have  been  the  infelicity  of  the  style  which  has 
recommended  the  Budget,  I  am  bound  to  say  that  the  first  attacks 
on  it  were  somewhat  infelicitous,  too,  and  it  is  an  infelicity  which 
we  have  all,  somehow  or  another,  learned  to  connect  with  the  word 
"  Duke."  Personally  I  think  Dukes  are  charming  people,  but  I  am 
bound  to  say  that  I  have  read  a  good  many  speeches  of  Dukes 
from  time  to  time,  and  they  have  stuck  to  their  form  too.  llieir 
speeches  remind  me  of  Tennyson's  line,  "  Tears,  Idle  Tears,"  and 
I  cannot  help  thinking  that  no  one  will  be  very  seriously  affected 
by  the  sobs  of  quite  well-to-do  folk.  .  .  . 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  Sio. 


398  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  66 

AN  EXTREME   CONSERVATIVE  VIEW  OF  THE  BUDGET 
{T]ie  Duke  of  Afar/borough,  Lords,  lYove/nber  2j,  iQog) 

The  Duke  of  Marlborough  -^ :  .  .  .  The  relations  of  this 
House  with  the  Lower  House,  which  the  Government  propose  to 
disturb,  are  in  themselves  a  monument  to  the  political  sagacity 
of  the  British  people.  Their  adjustment  has  been  perfected  by 
the  genius  of  great  men.  That  subtle  and  delicate  equipoise  has 
been  preserved  practically  unchanged  during  centuries  by  the  state- 
craft of  leading  men  in  either  House,  so  that  to-day  it  bears  some- 
thing of  that  mysterious  sanctity  which  time  alone  can  give.  It  is 
as  with  the  Abbey  within  whose  shadow  we  deliberate.  Inspired 
architects  planned  its  noble  outline,  its  solid  walls,  its  flowing  but- 
tresses, and  its  dominating  towers.  Zealous  masons  laboured  to 
transmute  the  architectual  vision  into  the  reality  of  solid  stone. 
But  not  all  the  splendour  of  the  initial  conception  nor  the  patient 
services  of  its  builders  could  have  sufficed  to  win  for  the  Abbey 
the  place  which  it  holds  in  our  hearts  to-day.  Time  has  touched  it 
with  his  finger,  and  to  his  ineffable  touch  it  owes  its  ultimate  con- 
secration. So  I  say  it  is  with  the  relations  between  the  two  Houses 
of  Parliament  in  the  vital  matter  of  finance.  They  too  have  been 
slowly  upreared  in  the  passage  of  the  centuries.  They  too  have 
been  hallowed  by  tradition.  Yet  to-day  the  Government,  acting 
through  the  Lower  House,  are  prepared  to  lay  rude  and  irreverent 
hands  upon  a  political  fabric  which  has  won  the  admiration  of  the 
civilised  world.  This  magnificent  monument,  this  unique  expres- 
sion of  the  temperament  of  our  people,  is  to  be  shattered  at  the 
bidding  of  a  demagogue  from  Wales,  and  may  I  respectfully  add, 
by  the  threat  of  the  noble  and  learned  Lord  on  the  Woolsack. 

The  Lord  Chancellor  :  I  made  no  threat. 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  84 1-2. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         399 

The  Duke  of  Marlborough  :  Neither  the  words  of  the  noble 
and  learned  Lord  on  the  Woolsack,  nor  the  silence  of  the  noble 
Earl,  Lord  Crewe,  —  a  self-constituted  mute  at  the  obsequies  of 
the  British  Constitution,  —  nor  the  remarks  of  the  noble  Earl  on 
the  Cross  Benches  have  in  any  way  shaken  my  confidence  that 
the  Amendment  moved  by  the  noble  Marquess,  Lord  Lansdowne, 
ought  to  receive  our  united  and  unanimous  support. 


Exti'-act  6y 

LORD  ROSEBERY  ON  THE  BUDGET 

{T/ie  Earl  of  Rosebery^  Lords ^  N^oveinbcr  24,  igog) 

The  Earl  of  Rosebery  ^ :  My  Lords,  I  earnestly  wish  that 
the  most  rev.  Primate  to  whose  weighty  words  we  have  just  listened 
with  so  much  attention  would  throw  the  regis  of  his  doctrine  of 
silence  over  myself,  who  am  quite  as  dissociated  from  Party  as  any 
Prelate  that  sits  upon  the  Bench  behind  him,  and  perhaps  more,  I 
think,  than  some.  I  wish  it  because  I  never  rose  to  address  your 
Lordships  with  more  reluctance  than  on  the  present  occasion  — 
partly  from  my  sense  of  the  awful  gravity  of  the  situation,  by  far 
the  greatest  that  has  occurred  in  my  lifetime  or  the  lifetime  of  any 
man  who  has  been  born  since  1832  ;  partly  from  a  sense  of  the 
personal  difficulties  that  I  feel  in  dealing  with  this  question.   .   .  . 

My  Lords,  I  am,  as  I  have  amply  proved,  hostile  to  the  Budget. 
I  cannot,  I  think,  be  more  hostile  to  the  Budget  than  I  am,  but  I  ^ 
am  not  willing  to  link  the  fortunes  of  the  Second  (Jhamber  with  ^ 
opposition  to  the  pjudget.  I  find  no  fault  with  the  Resolution  of 
the  noble  Marquess,  if  he  thought  it  right  to  have  a  Resolution  at 
all,  and  I  do  not  suppose  that  he  had  much  choice  in  the  matter. 
No  doubt  the  impetus  of  his  own  forces  carried  him  forward 
whether  he  wished  it  or  not,  and  of  course  it  may  be  fair  to  argue, 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  942  sqq. 


400  BRITISH    SOCIAL   POLITICS 

as  has  been  argued,  that  it  is  not  a  Resolution  for  the  rejection  of 
the  Bill,  but  a  method  for  bringing  about  an  appeal  to  the  people 
for  their  assent  or  negative  to  the  Budget.  There  is  nothing  I 
should  rejoice  at  so  much  as  any  reference  of  that  kind  if  there 
were  any  constitutional  means  of  obtaining  it  without  mixing  it  up 
with  other  issues  foreign  to  it,  and  which  may  greatly  impair  the 
directness  and  validity  of  the  decision.  If,  for  example,  you  had 
the  referendum  in  this  country  —  and  I  for  my  part  believe  that 
you  will  never  arrive  at  a  final  solution  of  the  question  of  the  ad- 
justment of  differences  between  the  two  Houses  without  some  form 
of  referendum  —  I  would  gladly  vote  that  it  should  be  applied  on 
this  occasion.   .   .   . 

My  Lords,  I  think  you  are  playing  for  too  heavy  a  stake  on  this 
occasion.  I  think  that  you  are  risking  in  your  opposition  to  what 
I  agree  with  you  in  thinking  is  an  iniquitous  and  dangerous  meas- 
ure, the  very  existence  of  a  Second  Chamber.  I  do  not  pretend  to 
be  veiy  greatly  alarmed  at  the  menaces  which  have  been  addressed 
to  us  on  this  and  on  other  occasions.  The  House  of  Lords  has 
lived  on  menaces  ever  since  I  can  recollect,  and  yet  it  seems  to  be 
in  a  tolerably  thriving  condition  still.  But  I  ask  you  to  remember 
this.  The  menaces  which  were  addressed  to  this  House  in  old 
days  were  addressed  by  statesmen  who  had  at  heart  the  balance 
of  the  constitutional  forces  in  this  country.  The  menaces  addressed 
to  you  now  come  from  a  wholly  different  school  of  opinion,  who 
wish  for  a  single  Chamber  and  who  set  no  value  on  the  controlling 
and  revising  forces  of  a  Second  Chamber  —  a  school  of  opinion 
which,  if  you  like  it  and  do  not  dread  the  word,  is  eminently  revo- 
lutionary in  essence,  if  not  in  fact.  I  ask  you  to  bear  in  mind  that 
fact  when  you  weigh  the  consequences  of  the  vote  which  you  are 
to  give  to-morrow  night.  "  Hang  consequences,"  said  my  noble 
friend  Lord  Camperdown  last  night,  "  let  them  take  care  of  them- 
selves." That  is  a  noble  utterance  —  a  Balaklava  utterance.  Noth- 
ing more  intrepid  could  be  said.  But  the  truest  courage  in  these 
matters  weighs  the  consequences,  not  to  the  individual,  but  to  the 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        40I 

State,  and  thinks  not  once,  but  twice  or  thrice  before  it  gives  a 
vote  which  may  involve  such  enormous  constitutional  consequences. 
.  .  .  Remember,  that  in  hanging  up  or  in  rejecting  the  Budget  the 
House  of  Lords  is  doing  exactly  what  its  enemies  wish  it  to  do.^ 
Now,  I  believe  that  in  life  it  is  a  pretty  safe  maxim  to  ascertain 
what  it  is  }'our  enemy  wishes  you  to  do,  and  to  do  something  very 
much  unlike  it.  I  confess  I  have  no  doubt  when  I  read  the  speeches 
delivered  in  various  parts  of  the  country,  speeches  unusual  and  un- 
precedented in  my  time  as  regards  speeches  by  Cabinet  Ministers, 
that  they  are  meant  to  stir  up  and  incite  the  House  of  Lords  to  do 
exactly  the  thing  which  the  House  of  Lords  meditates  doing. 

I  confess  that  policy  does  not  appeal  to  me.    I  should  like  a  less 
heroic  policy,  which  I  think  would  have  answered  much  better  the 
majority  of  this  House,  but  which  I  fear  it  is  too  late  to  ask  the 
House  to  adopt,  although  I  believe  it  to  be  the  winning  policy  for 
those  who  are  opposed  to  the  Budget.    I  should  have  liked  to  see  '^ 
the  House  of  Lords  pass  this  Finance  Bill,  not  because  I  have  a 
good  opinion  of  it,  but  because  I  have  such  an  excessively  bad  i^ 
opinion  of  it.   .   .   .    I  believe  that  if  you  gave  the  country  an  ex- 
perience of  the  Budget  in  operation,  you  would  achieve  a  victoiy 
when  you  next  approach  the  polls  which  would  surprise  yourselves 
and  would  give  you  the  power  of  revising  the  finance  of  this  coun-/^' 
tiy  by  methods  more  in  consonance  with  your  own  principles  and 
your  own  common-sense.    We  should  then  have  an  '&nti-Socialist — 
Government,  a  luxury  which  I  cannot  say  we  possess  now.    We 
should  have  a  reformed  Second  Chamber,  not  merely  in  the  way  — 
of  purging  it  to  some  extent,  and  arriving  at  the  choicest  part  of 
it  by  delegation  and  election,  but  also  by  renovating  it  by  means 
of  those  external  elements  that  must  necessarily  give  strength  to  a 
Second  Chamber  —  all  that  would  have  been  achieved  in  the  best 
and,  in  the  non- Party  sense,  the  most  conservative  interests  of  this 
United    Kingdom.    LTnfortunately,   that  is  not   the   line   that   the 
LIousc  is  going  to  take.    I   am  sorr)-  —  with  all  my  heart  I  am 
sorr)'  —  that   I   cannot  give  a  vote  against   the    Budget   on   this 


402  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

occasion.  My  interest  in  this  matter  is  mainly  that  of  the  Second 
Chamber,  and  I  cannot  stake  all  my  hopes  of  its  future  utility  and 
reform  on  the  precarious  and  tumultuous  chances,  involved  as  they 
will  be  with  many  other  irrelevant  and  scarcely  honest  issues  —  the 
tumultuous  hazards  of  a  General  Election. 


Extract  68 
LORD  MORLEY  ON  THE  BUDGET 

(Viscojint  Morley  of  Blackbin-n^  Secretary  of  State  for  India,  Loi-ds, 
Nci^ember  2g,  igog) 

Lord  Morley  ^ :  .  .  .  I  particularly,  for  my  part,  object  to  the 
'■  referendum.  Why  ?  Because  it  weakens  what  is  the  most  impor- 
tant thing  for  this  country  to  maintain  —  the  sense  of  responsibil- 
ity in  the  House  of  Commons.  If  you  tell  the  House  of  Commons 
that  they  are  liable  to  have  a  given  conclusion  of  their  own  sub- 
mitted to  other  people  —  whether  they  be  members  of  this  House 
or  people  in  the  country  —  you  weaken  their  own  personal  indi- 
vidual and  collective  responsibility.   .   .  . 

By  this  Amendment  you  are  subjecting  the  Budget  to  what  is 
called,  in  the  jargon  to  which  I  have  referred,  di  plebiscite.  If  there 
is  any  one  matter  which  cannot  be  usefully  or  wisely  submitted  to 
\l  a  plebiscite,  it  is  a  Budget.  It  is  one  of  those  things  on  which  you 
cannot  say  Yes  or  No.  How  can  any  one  say  Yes  or  No  to  this 
Budget  ?  Noble  Lords  here  do  not  like  the  Budget,  but  the  Budget 
contains  any  number  of  provisions,  qualifications,  intricacies ;  it  is 
a  complex  of  things  to  which  you  cannot  give  a  plain  Yes  or  No, 
which  is  the  point  of  a  plebiscite.   .   .   . 

Now  another  point.  It  is  argued  that  you  will  vote  for  this 
Amendment  because  you  want  to  arrest  Socialism.  I  am,  and 
always  have  been,  a  pretty  strong  individualist.  But  just  let  us 
look   at   these    Socialist   allegations   and  the  assumption   that   by 

1  I'arliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  1137  sqq. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        403 

rejecting  this  Bill  and  passing  your  Amendment  you  are  putting  a 
spoke  into  the  wheel  of  Socialism.  The  people  of  this  country  are 
either  of  the  predatory  species  or  they  are  not ;  they  are  either 
in  favour  of  predatory  destructive  Socialism  or  they  are  not.  If 
they  are,  it  is  quite  certain  that  the  success  of  this  Parliamentary 
operation  of  your  Lordships  will  not  set  up  any  dam  or  rampart 
or  barrier  against  the  great  destructive  flood  such  as  would  then 
arise.  Anyone  who  tells  you  that  by  passing  this  Amendment  you'' 
are  obstructing  Socialism  is  as  foolish  as  were  the  courtiers  of 
King  Canute.  But  I  do  not  believe,  and  I  am  quite  sure  all  your 
Lordships  do  not  believe,  that  our  countrymen  are  a  predatory 
species.    No  Englishman  can  think  so. 

If  you  will  forgive  a  passing  personal  reference,  it  was  my 
fortune  to  be  —  I  only  mention  it  to  show  that  I  am  not  talking 
of  the  working  people  of  this  country  with  a  Utopian  head  in  the 
clouds  —  for  twelve  years  a  Member  for  what  was  in  those  days 
one  of  the  largest  constituencies  in  England.  It  was  an  enormous 
constituency,  and  my  return  was  always  due  to  the  skilled  artisans, 
mainly  workers  in  the  famous  Elswick  factory  —  skilled  and  admi- 
rable artisans.  It  is  true  that  at  the  end  of  twelve  years  they  turned 
me  out,  but  I  had  plenty  of  time  —  and  I  am  not  entirely  without 
the  faculty  of  observation  —  to  satisfy  myself  that  the  skilled  arti- 
sans of  this  country,  aye,  and  many  more  than  they,  are  not  men 
wearing  the  Phrygian  cap.    No,  they  are  not  "  Reds."   .   .   . 

There  will,  no  doubt,  be  foolish  proposals  made  by  the  pitiful 
and  sympathetic,  whether  politicians  or  philanthropists  outside  poli- 
tics —  there  will  be  proposals  made,  if  you  like,  full  of  charlatanry 
and  full  of  quackery.  But,  anyhow,  it  is  inevitable  to  anybody  who 
has  followed  the  course  of  movements  of  a  Socialistic  kind  in 
France  and  other  countries  that  you  should  have  these  experiments 
tried.  My  own  hope,  my  own  conviction,  is  that  at  the  end  of 
these  experiments  there  will  be  left  behind  a  fertile  and  fertilising 
residue  of  good.  Mill,  whose  name  has  been  so  often  quoted  in 
these  debates  on  fiscal  matters,  said  at  the  very  end  of  his  life  he 


404  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

was  averse  to  Socialism,  and  in  a  certain  production  of  his,  where 
he  described  the  possible  dangers  of  Socialism,  he  said,  "  If  So- 
cialism with  all  its  dangers  was  the  only  alternative  to  the  horrors 
of  our  present  system,  I  would  be  a  Socialist." 

The  noble  Viscount,  Lord  Milner,  said  the  other  day  that  he 
would  be  very  sorry  to  be  a  member  of  a  dummy  House  of  Lords, 
and  I  suppose  anyone  who  sits  in  an  assembly,  however  new  a 
comer  he  may  be,  would  be  very  sorry  to  sit  in  a  dummy  assembly. 
He  would  rather  absent  himself  altogether.  But  there  is  something 
worse  than  a  dummy  House  of  Lords,  and  that  is  a  dummy  House 
of  Commons.  What  else  does  this  operation  which  you  are  going 
to  consummate  to-morrow  night  mean  than  reducing  the  House 
of  Commons  to  a  dummy  ?  They  discussed  the  Budget  for  six 
months.  I  forget  how  many  hundreds  of  sittings  and  how  many 
hundreds  of  Divisions  there  were.  I  understand  from  those  who 
speak  with  a  certain  impartiality  that  it  was  discussed  with  a  freedom 
and  a  fullness  of  detail  almost,  if  not  entirely,  without  precedent 
in  our  recent  Parliamentary  annals.  .  .  .  There  was  no  guillotine. 
There  were  ceaseless  interviews  with  deputations,  and  yet  all  this 
prolonged  and  careful  labour,  discussion,  thought,  contrivance  —  all 
that  is  to  go  for  nothing,  and  all  its  results  are  to  be  pulverised  and 
brought  to  naught  by  a  trenchant  sweep  of  the  noble  Marquess's 
arm.    That  is  what  I  call  making  a  dummy  House  of  Commons. 

In  the  Division  on  the  third  reading,  what  were  the  numbers  ? 
They  were  379  for  the  Budget  Bill  and  149  against  it.  In  this 
House  to-morrow  night  let  us  suppose  it  is  500  against  50.  My 
Lords,  the  more  triumphant  your  majority,  the  more  huge  the 
disparity  between  your  numbers  and  ours,  the  more  flagrant  the 
political  scandal,  and  the  more  blazing  in  the  public  eye  the  Con- 
stitutional paradox.  Such  a  contrast  as  that,  379  against  149  in 
one  House,  only  a  four-year-old  House,  and  400  or  500  in  this 
House  against  40  or  50  —  I  say  it  cannot  last.  .  .  . 

I  do  not  say  at  all,  and  have  never  promised,  that  this  Budget 
will  bring  right  away  the  Millennium,  but  I  am  quite  certain  that  it 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         405 

will  not  bring  Pandemonium.  It  will  bring  neither  the  Millennium 
nor  Pandemonium,  and  I  think  that  noble  Lords  opposite  are 
beginning  to  feel  that  perhaps  their  apprehensions  were  unduly- 
aroused.  Let  me  make  one  observation  to  which  I  believe  the 
noble  Marquess  will  attach  certain  weight.  When  Mr.  Gladstone 
was  going  through  his  early  financial  operations,  he  was  watched 
by  nobody  in  the  world  with  a  more  eager  interest  than  by  Cavour. 
I  am  not  speaking  quite  without  the  book  when  I  say  there  are 
now  Ministers  in  European  countries,  with  their  own  battles  to 
fight,  who  are  watching  with  some  anxiety  and  some  apprehension 
the  double  issue,  fiscal  and  constitutional,  in  which  we  are  involved 
by  these  proceedings.  For  many  glorious  generations  England  has 
been  the  stable  and  far-shining  model  of  reform,  and  any  clouding 
of  her  position  in  either  fiscal  or  constitutional  policy  will  be  a  gain, 
and  a  heavy  gain,  on  the  Continent  of  Europe  to  the  parties  of 
reaction.  .  .   . 

Lastly,  the  noble  Marquess  must  have  foreseen  that  the  success 
of  this  Amendment  and  its  consequences  must  lead  a  pretty  straight 
way  to  constitutional  revision,  and  I  am  sure  he  must  know  that 
there  is  no  such  battle  ground,  if  you  look  at  our  own  history  in 
the  seventeenth  century,  at  the  modern  history  of  the  LTnited 
States,  or  at  that  of  half  of  the  countries  of  Continental  Europe, 
for  the  fiercest  and  most  determined  conflicts,  as  constitutional 
revision.  With  regard  to  the  Second  Chamber,  I  venture  to  call  it 
the  pons  asinorum  of  democracy.  I  hope  noble  Lords  will  recognise 
that.  The  scene  in  this  House  during  the  last  ten  days  must  not, 
I  think,  be  counted  one  of  those  brilliant  and  exciting  stage  plays, 
political  and  party  stage  plays,  of  which  some  of  us  have  seen  so 
many.  I  think  it  is  much  more  than  a  mere  stage  play.  It  is  the 
first  step  on  a  tremendous  journey,  and,  as  we  all  know,  when  we 
troop  off  home  to-morrow  night  we  shall  not  think  that,  though  the 
theatre  is  empty,  the  curtain  has  fallen  upon  a  completed  drama. 
We  shall  all  know  in  our  hearts  that  the  note  has  scninded  for  a 
very  angry  and  perhaps  prolonged  battle. 


406  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  6g 

THE  LORDS'  REJECTION  OF  THE  BUDGET 

{The  Earl  of  Crewe,  Lord  Privy  Seal  and  Secretary  of  State  for  the 
Colonies,  Lords,  N'ovet/iber  jo,  igog) 

The  Earl  of  Crewe  ^ :  .  .  .  My  Lords,  we  are  now  going  to 
vote.  In  i860  when  the  Paper  Duty  Bill  was  before  this  House 
Mr.  Bright  said,  speaking  of  the  then  action  of  your  Lordships' 
House,  "  They  voted  out  this  Bill  by  a  large  majority  with  a 
chuckle,  thinking  that  by  doing  so  they  were  making  a  violent  at- 
tack on  the  Ministry,  and  particularly  upon  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer."  My  Lords,  that  is  what  you  are  going  to  do.  Who 
are  going  to  vote  ?  The  noble  Lords  who  are  here.  Who  are  not 
going  to  vote  ?  I  cannot  help  alluding,  although  it  has  been  men- 
tioned before,  to  the  absence  from  the  noble  Marquess's  battalions 
of  the  noble  Viscount,  Lord  St.  Aldwyn  —  one  of  the  most  experi- 
enced authorities  on  political  finance  in  the  country,  and  a  Conserv- 
ative of  Conservatives.  He  is  not  here.  But  when  the  division  list 
is  scanned  to-morrow,  as  scanned  it  will  be,  by  those  who  desire  to 
weigh  as  well  as  to  count,  many  names  will  be  missed  from  it. 
There  will  be  the  names  of  many  of  those  who  have  grown  old  in 
the  service  of  the  State  at  home  and  abroad,  particularly  of  those 
who  have  served  in  distant  parts  of  the  Empire ;  the  names  of 
many  of  those  who  do  the  greater  part  of  the  real  work  of  this 
House  —  thankless  work,  and  not,  I  think,  often  sufficiently  re- 
warded by  public  appreciation  —  in  the  committee  room  upstairs  ; 
there  will  be  many  names  of  those  who  possess,  if  I  may  venture 
to  say  so,  the  coolest  heads  and  the  most  amply  furnished  minds  in 
the  House ;  many  of  those  who,  when  it  is  a  question  of  deciding 
merits  of  some  great  dispute  between  capital  and  labour,  are  called 
upon  to  arbitrate  in  such  cases  by  the  common  consent  of  all  classes 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  4,  col.  1324  sqq. 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        407 

of  our  fellow-countrymen.  My  Lords,  many  of  those  will  not  be 
here.  Like  the  images  of  the  Roman  patriots  at  another  kind  of 
funeral  some  two  thousand  years  ago,  when  the  historian  said, 
Effiilgebant  eo  ipso  quod  effigies  eoi'iim  non  videbaiitur^  they  are 
even  more  conspicuous  by  their  absence  than  they  would  be  if 
they  recorded  their  vote.  I  know  you  will  not  agree  with  me,  but 
I  do  say  that  in  tearing  up  the  ancient  charters,  in  removing  the 
venerable  landmarks,  you  are  making  a  most  tragic  blunder.  You 
are  not  afraid  of  the  consequences ;  no  one  could  suppose  you 
would  be  afraid ;  if  you  are  afraid  of  anything  in  this  matter, 
you  are  possibly  just  the  least  bit  afraid  of  being  thought  afraid. 
That  is  the  only  scintilla  of  fear  which  I  think  could  be  recognised 
on  the  Benches  opposite. 

It  has  been  said  in  debate  that  there  has  been  a  sinister  kind  of 
conspiracy,  a  plot,  to  lure  your  Lordships  into  an  impossible  posi- 
tion. Perhaps  I  may  be  permitted  to  say  that  I  am  in  as  good  a 
position  as  anybody  to  judge  whether  that  is  so,  and  I  think  I  can 
show  you  it  is  not  so.  I  do  not  think  I  am  breaking  any  Cabinet 
confidence  when  I  say  that  the  great  majority  of  my  colleagues 
including  —  unless  I  am  mistaken  —  the  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer himself,  have  been  infinitely  more  sanguine  than  I  have 
been  all  through  that  your  Lordships  would  pass  the  Finance  Bill, 
and  it  was  only  at  a  very  recent  date  that  they  recognised  the 
probability  of  the  action  your  Lordships  are  taking.  That  I  think 
is  conclusive  proof  that  there  has  been  no  conspiracy  to  put  your 
Lordships  into  a  position  where  you  could  not  pass  it.   .   .   . 

If  you  think  that  any  of  us  on  this  side  of  the  House  welcome 
this  crisis,  you  are  entirely  mistaken.  But  we  are  compelled  to  face 
it,  not  only  because  our  political  existence  as  a  Party  is  involved, 
but  because  in  our  view  the  interests  of  the  country  and  of  the 
Empire  depend  upon  the  maintenance  of  a  reasonable  constitutional 
balance  between  the  governing  powers  of  the  State.  It  may  be, 
my  Lords,  that  when  the  new  Parliament  meets  we  shall  be  sitting 
where  you  sit  now.    It  may  be  that  we  shall  still  be  seated  on  these 


408  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Benches  here.  But,  my  Lords,  whether  we  sit  there  or  whether 
we  sit  here,  we  must,  after  the  action  which  your  Lordships  have 
thought  fit  to  take  to-night,  set  ourselves  to  obtain  guarantees  —  not 
the  old  guarantees  sanctioned  by  the  course  of  time  and  enforced  by 
accommodation  between  the  two  Houses,  but  if  necessary,  if  there 
be  no  other  way,  guarantees  fenced  about  and  guarded  by  the  force 
of  Statute  —  guarantees  which  will  prevent  that  indiscriminate 
destruction  of  our  legislation  of  which  your  work  to-night  is  the 
climax  and  the  crown. 

The  Lord  Chancellor  :  The  original  Question  was  "  That  the 
Bill  be  now  read  a  second  time,"  to  which  an  Amendment  has  been 
moved  to  leave  out  all  the  words  after  "  That  "  for  the  purpose 
of  inserting  the  following  Motion,  "  This  House  is  not  justified  in 
giving  its  consent  to  this  Bill  until  it  has  been  submitted  to  the 
judgment  of  the  country."  The  Question  I  have  to  put  is  whether 
the  words  proposed  to  be  left  out  shall  stand  part  of  the  Motion. 

On  Question  ? 

Their  Lordships  divided  :  Contents,  75  ;  Not-Con  tents,  350. 


Extract  jo 

FINANCE   (1909-10)    ACT,   1910 

(/o  Edw.  7,  cJi.  S,  in  part) 

An  Act  to  grant  certain  Duties  of  Customs  and  Inland  Revenue 
(including  Excise),  to  alter  other  Duties,  and  to  amend  the 
Law  relating  to  Customs  and  Inland  Revenue  (including 
Excise),  and  to  make  other  financial  provisions. 

(29th  Aprii  19 10) 
Most  Gracious  Sovereign, 

We,  Your  Majesty's  most  dutiful  and  loyal  subjects  the  Com- 
mons of  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  in 
Parliament  assembled,  towards  raising  the  negessary  supplies  to 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET        409 

defray  Your  Majesty's  public  expenses,  and  making  an  addition 
to  the  public  revenue,  have  freely  and  voluntarily  resolved  to  give 
and  grant  unto  Your  Majesty  the  several  duties  herein-after  men- 
tioned ;  and  do  therefore  most  humbly  beseech  Your  Majesty  that 
it  may  be  enacted,  and  be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent 
Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual 
and  Temporal,  and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled, 
and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  as  follow^s : 


Part  I 

Duties  on  Land  Values 

I.  Duty  on  Increment  Value 

Subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  Part  of  this  Act,  there  shall  be 
charged,  levied,  and  paid  on  the  increment  value  of  any  land  a 
duty,  called  increment  value  duty,  at  the  rate  of  one  pound  for 
every  complete  five  pounds  of  that  value  accruing  after  the  thir- 
tieth day  of  April  nineteen  hundred  and  nine,  and  — 

{a)  on  the  occasion  of  any  transfer  on  sale  of  the  fee  simple 
of  the  land  or  of  any  interest  in  the  land,  in  pursuance 
of  any  contract  made  after  the  commencement  of  this 
Act,  or  the  grant,  in  pursuance  of  any  contract  made 
after  the  commencement  of  this  Act,  of  any  lease  (not 
being  a  lease  for  a  term  of  years  not  exceeding  fourteen 
years)  of  the  land  ;  and 
(/')  on  the  occasion  of  the  death  of  any  person  dying  after 
the  commencement  of  this  Act,  where  the  fee  simple  of 
the  land  or  any  interest  in  the  land  is  comprised  in  the 
property  passing  on  the  death  of  the  deceased  within  the 
meaning  of  sections  one  and  two,  subsection  (i)  ((?),  (/^), 
and  (r),  and  subsection  three,  of  the  Finance  Act,  1894, 
as  amended  by  any  subsequent  enactment ;  and 


4IO  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(r)  where  the  fee  simple  of  the  land  or  any  interest  in  the  land 
is  held  by  any  body  corporate  or  by  any  body  unincor- 
porate  as  defined  by  section  twelve  of  the  Customs  and 
Inland  Revenue  Act,  1885,  in  such  a  manner  or  on  such 
permanent  trusts  that  the  land  or  interest  is  not  liable  to 
death  duties,  on  such  periodical  occasions  as  are  provided 
in  this  Act, 
the  duty,  or  proportionate  part  of  the  duty,  so  far  as  it  has  not 
been  paid  on  any  previous  occasion,  shall  be  collected  in  accord- 
ance with  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

2.  Definitio7i  of  Increment  Value 

(i)  For  the  purposes  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  the  increment  value 
of  any  land  shall  be  deemed  to  be  the  amount  (if  any)  by  which 
the  site  value  of  the  land,  on  the  occasion  on  which  increment  value 
duty  is  to  be  collected  as  ascertained  in  accordance  with  this  sec- 
tion, exceeds  the  original  site  value  of  the  land  as  ascertained  in 
accordance  with  the  general  provisions  of  this  Part  of  this  Act 
as  to  valuation. 

(2)  The  site  value  of  the  land  on  the  occasion  on  which  incre- 
ment value  duty  is  to  be  collected  shall  be  taken  to  be  — 

{a)  where  the  occasion  is  a  transfer  on  sale  of  the  fee  simple 
of  the  land,  the  value  of  the  consideration  for  the  trans- 
fer ;  and 
iji)  where  the  occasion  is  the  grant  of  any  lease  of  the  land,  or 
the  transfer  on  sale  of  any  interest  in  the  land,  the  value 
of  the  fee  simple  of  the  land,  calculated  on  the  basis  of 
the  value  of  the  consideration  for  the  grant  of  the  lease 
or  the  transfer  of  the  interest ;  and 
(r)  where  the  occasion  is  the  death  of  any  person,  and  the  fee 
simple  of  the  land  is  property  passing  on  that  death,  the 
principal  value  of  the  land  as  ascertained  for  the  purposes 
of  Part  I  of  the  Finance  Act,  1894,  and  where  any  in- 
terest in  the  land  is  property  passing  on  that  death  the 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         411 

value  of  the  fee  simple  of  the  land  calculated  on  the  basis 
of  the  principal  value  of  the  interest  as  so  ascertained ; 
and 
(({)  where  the  occasion  is  a  periodical  occasion  on  which  the 
duty  is  to  be  collected  in  respect  of  the  fee  simple  of  any 
land  or  of  any  interest  in  any  land  held  by  a  body  cor- 
porate or  unincorporate,  the  total  value  of  the  land  on 
that  occasion  to  be  estimated  in  accordance  with  the  gen- 
eral provisions  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  as  to  valuation ; 
subject  in  each  case  to  the  like  deductions  as  are  made,  under  the 
general  provisions  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  as  to  valuation,  for  the 
purpose  of  arriving  at  the  site  value  of  land  from  the  total  value. 

(3)  Where  it  is  proved  to  the  Commissioners  on  an  application 
made  for  the  purpose  within  the  time  fixed  by  this  section  that  the 
site  value  of  any  land  at  the  time  of  any  transfer  on  sale  of  the 
fee  simple  of  the  land  or  of  any  interest  in  the  land,  which  took 
place  at  any  time  within  twenty  years  before  the  thirtieth  day  of 
April,  nineteen  hundred  and  nine,  exceeded  the  original  site  value 
of  the  land  as  ascertained  under  this  Act,  the  site  value  at  that 
time  shall  be  substituted,  for  the  purposes  of  increment  value  duty, 
for  the  original  site  value  as  so  ascertained,  and  the  provisions  of 
this  Part  of  this  Act  shall  apply  accordingly. 

Site  value  shall  be  estimated  for  the  purposes  of  this  provision 
by  reference  to  the  consideration  given  on  the  transfer  in  the  same 
manner  as  it  is  estimated  by  reference  to  the  consideration  given 
on  a  transfer  where  increment  value  duty  is  to  be  collected  on  the 
occasion  of  such  a  transfer  after  the  passing  of  this  Act. 

This  provision  shall  apply  to  a  mortgage  of  the  fee  simple  of 
the  land  or  any  interest  in  land  in  the  same  manner  as  it  applies 
to  a  transfer,  with  the  substitution  of  the  amount  secured  by  the 
mortgage  for  the  consideration. 

An  application  for  the  purpose  of  this  section  must  be  made 
within  three  months  after  the  original  site  value  of  the  land  has 
been  finally  settled  under  this  Part  of  this  Act,  ,  .  , 


412  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

I  J.  Reversion  Duty 

(i)  On  the  determination  of  any  lease  of  land  there  shall  be 
charged,  levied,  and  paid,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  Part  of 
this  Act,  on  the  value  of  the  benefit  accruing  to  the  lessor  by  reason 
of  the  determination  of  the  lease  a  duty,  called  reversion  duty,  at 
the  rate  of  one  pound  for  every  complete  ten  pounds  of  that  value. 

(2)  For  the  purposes  of  this  section  the  value  of  the  benefit 
accruing  to  the  lessor  shall  be  deemed  to  be  the  amount  (if  any) 
by  which  the  total  value  (as  defined  for  the  purpose  of  the  general 
provisions  of  this  Part  of  this  Act  relating  to  valuation)  of  the  land 
at  the  time  the  lease  determines,  subject  to  the  deduction  of  any 
part  of  the  total  value  which  is  attributable  to  any  works  executed 
or  expenditure  of  a  capital  nature  incurred  by  the  lessor  during  the 
term  of  the  lease  and  of  all  compensation  payable  by  such  lessor 
at  the  determination  of  the  lease,  exceeds  the  total  value  of  the 
land  at  the  time  of  the  original  grant  of  the  lease,  to  be  ascertained 
on  the  basis  of  the  rent  reserved  and  payments  made  in  considera- 
tion of  the  lease  (including,  in  cases  where  a  nominal  rent  only  has 
been  reserved,  the  value  of  any  covenant  or  undertaking  to  erect 
buildings  or  to  expend  any  sums  upon  the  property),  but,  where 
the  lessor  is  himself  entitled  only  to  a  leasehold  interest,  the  value 
of  the  benefit  as  so  ascertained  shall  be  reduced  in  proportion  to 
the  amount  by  which  the  value  of  his  interest  is  less  than  the  value 
of  the  fee  simple.   .   .   . 

16.    Undeveloped  Land  Duty 

(i)  Subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  Part  of  this  Act,  there 
shall  be  charged,  levied,  and  paid  for  the  financial  year  ending  the 
thirty-first  day  of  March  nineteen  hundred  and  ten,  and  every  sub- 
sequent financial  year  in  respect  of  the  site  value  of  undeveloped 
land  a  duty,  called  undeveloped  land  duty,  at  the  rate  of  one  half- 
penny for  every  twenty  shillings  of  that  site  value, 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         413 

(2)  For  the  purposes  of  this  Part  of  this  Act,  land  shall  be 
deemed  to  be  undeveloped  land  if  it  has  not  been  developed  by 
the  erection  of  dwelling-houses  or  of  buildings  for  the  purposes  of 
any  business,  trade,  or  industry  other  than  agriculture  (but  includ- 
ing glasshouses  or  greenhouses),  or  is  not  otherwise  used  bona  fide 
for  any  business,  trade,  or  industry  other  than  agriculture : 
Provided  that  — 

(a)  Where  any  land  having  been  so  developed  or  used  reverts 
to  the  condition  of  undeveloped  land  owing  to  the  build- 
ings becoming  derelict,  or  owing  to  the  land  ceasing  to  be 
used  for  any  business,  trade,  or  industry  other  than  agri- 
culture, it  shall,  on  the  expiration  of  one  year  after  the 
buildings  have  so  become  derelict  or  the  land  ceases  to 
be  so  used,  as  the  case  may  be,  be  treated  as  undeveloped 
land  for  the  purposes  of  undeveloped  land  duty  until  it 
is  again  so  developed  or  used ;  and 
(^)  Where  the  owner  of  any  land  included  in  any  scheme  of 
land  development  shows  that  he  or  his  predecessors  in 
title  have,  with  a  view  to  the  land  being  developed  or  used 
as  aforesaid,  incurred  expenditure  on  roads  (including 
paving,  curbing,  metalling,  and  other  works  in  connexion 
with  roads)  or  sewers,  that  land  shall,  to  the  extent  of 
one  acre  for  every  complete  hundred  pounds  of  that 
expenditure,  for  the  purposes  of  this  section,  be  treated 
as  land  so  developed  or  used  although  it  is  not  for  the 
time  being  actually  so  developed  or  used,  but,  for  the  pur- 
poses of  this  provision,  no  expenditure  shall  be  taken 
into  account  if  ten  years  have  elapsed  since  the  date  of 
the  expenditure,  or  if  after  the  date  of  the  expenditure 
the  land  having  been  developed  reverts  to  the  condition 
of  undeveloped  land,  and  in  a  case  where  the  amount 
of  the  expenditure  does  not  cover  the  whole  of  the  land 
included  in  the  scheme  of  land  development,  the  part  of 
the  land  to  be  treated  as  land  developed  or  used  as 


414  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

aforesaid  shall  be  determined  by  the  Commissioners  as 
being  the  land  with  a  view  to  the  development  or  use 
of  which  as  aforesaid  the  expenditure  has  been  in  the 
main  incurred. 

(3)  For  the  purposes  of  undeveloped  land  duty,  the  site  value 
of  undeveloped  land  shall  be  taken  to  be  the  value  adopted  as  the 
original  site  value  or,  where  the  site  value  has  been  ascertained 
under  any  subsequent  periodical  valuation  of  undeveloped  land  for 
the  time  being  in  force,  the  site  value  as  so  ascertained : 

Provided  that  where  increment  value  duty  has  been  paid  in 
respect  of  the  increment  value  of  any  undeveloped  land,  the  site 
value  of  that  land  shall,  for  the  purposes  of  the  assessment  and 
collection  of  undeveloped  land  duty,  be  reduced  by  a  sum  equal  to 
five  times  the  amount  paid  as  increment  value  duty. 

(4)  For  the  purposes  of  undeveloped  land  duty  undeveloped 
land  does  not  include  the  minerals.  .   .   . 


20.  Mineral  Rights  Duty  and  Provisions  as  to  Minerals 

(i)  There  shall  be  charged,  levied,  and  paid  for  the  financial 
year  ending  the  thirty-first  day  of  March  nineteen  hundred  and 
ten  and  every  subsequent  financial  year  on  the  rental  value  of 
all  rights  to  work  minerals  and  of  all  mineral  wayleaves,  a  duty 
(in  this  Act  referred  to  as  a  mineral  rights  duty)  at  the  rate  in 
each  case  of  one  shilling  for  every  twenty  shillings  of  that  rental 
value. 

(2)  The  rental  value  shall  be  taken  to  be  — 

{a)  Where  the  right  to  work  the  minerals  is  the  subject  of 
a  mining  lease,  the  amount  of  rent  paid  by  the  work- 
ing lessee  in  the  last  working  year  in  respect  of  that 
right ;  and 
{U)  Where  minerals  are  being  worked  by  the  proprietor  there- 
of, the  amount  which  is  determined  by  the  Commis- 
sioners to  be  the  sum  which  would  have  been  received 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         415 

as  rent  by  the  proprietor  in  the  last  working  year  if  the 
right  to  work  the  minerals  had  been  leased  to  a  work- 
ing lessee  for  a  term  and  at  a  rent  and  on  conditions 
customary  in  the  district,  and  the  minerals  had  been 
worked  to  the  same  extent  and  in  the  same  manner  as 
they  have  been  worked  by  the  proprietor  in  that  year : 
Provided  that  the  Commissioners  shall  cause  a  copy 
of  their  valuation  of  such  rent  to  be  served  on  the 
proprietor ;  and 
(c)  In  the  case  of  a  mineral  wayleave,  the  amount  of  rent 
paid  by  the  working  lessee  in  the  last  working  year  in 
respect  of  the  wayleave  : 
Provided  that  if  in  any  special  case  it  is  shown  to  the  Commis- 
sioners that  the  rent  paid  by  a  working  lessee  exceeds  the  rent 
customary  in  the  district,  and  partly  represents  a  return  for  expend- 
iture on  the  part  of  any  proprietor  of  the  minerals  which  would 
ordinarily  have  been  borne  by  the  lessee,  the  Commissioners  shall 
substitute  as  the  rental  value  of  the  right  to  work  the  minerals  or 
the  mineral  wayleaves,  as  the  case  may  be,  such  rent  as  the  Com- 
missioners determine  would  have  been  the  rent  customary  in  the 
district  if  the  expenditure  had  been  borne  by  the  lessee.   .   .  . 

26.    ]''al nation  of  Land  for  Purposes  of  Act 

(i)  The  Commissioners  shall,  as  soon  as  may  be  after  the  pass- 
ing of  this  Act,  cause  a  valuation  to  be  made  of  all  land  in  the 
United  Kingdom,  showing  separately  the  total  value  and  the  site 
value  respectively  of  the  land,  and  in  the  case  of  agricultural  land 
the  value  of  the  land  for  agricultural  purposes  where  that  value  is 
different  from  the  site  value.  Each  piece  of  land  which  is  imder 
separate  occupation,  and,  if  the  owner  so  requires,  any  part  of  any 
land  which  is  under  separate  occupation,  shall  be  separately  valued, 
and  the  value  shall  be  estimated  as  on  the  thirtieth  day  of  April 
nineteen  hundred  and  nine. 


4l6  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(2)  Any  owner  of  land  and  any  person  receiving  rent  in  respect 
of  any  land  shall,  on  being  required  by  notice  from  the  Commis- 
sioners, furnish  to  the  Commissioners  a  return  containing  such  par- 
ticulars as  the  Commissioners  may  require  as  to  the  rent  received 
by  him,  and  as  to  the  ownership,  tenure,  area,  character,  and  use 
of  the  land,  and  the  consideration  given  on  any  previous  sale  or 
lease  of  the  land,  and  any  other  matters  which  may  properly  be 
recjuired  for  the  purpose  of  the  valuation  of  the  land,  and  which 
it  is  in  his  power  to  give,  and,  if  any  owner  of  land  or  person  re- 
ceiving any  rent  in  respect  of  the  land  is  required  by  the  Commis- 
sioners to  make  a  return  under  this  section,  and  fails  to  make 
such  a  return  within  the  time,  not  being  less  than  thirty  days,  speci- 
fied in  the  notice  requiring  a  return,  he  shall  be  liable  to  a  penalty 
not  exceeding  fifty  pounds  to  be  recoverable  in  the  High  Court. 

(3)  Any  owner  of  land  may,  if  he  thinks  fit,  furnish  to  the  Com- 
missioners his  estimate  of  the  total  value  or  site  value  or  both  of 
the  land,  and  the  Commissioners,  in  making  their  valuation,  shall 
consider  any  estimate  so  furnished.   .   .   . 

28.  Periodica/  Valiiatio/i  of  Undeveloped  Lafid 

For  the  purpose  of  obtaining  a  periodical  valuation  of  unde- 
veloped land  the  Commissioners  shall,  in  the  year  nineteen  hundred 
and  fourteen  and  in  every  subsequent  fifth  year,  cause  a  valuation 
to  be  made  of  undeveloped  land  showing  the  site  value  of  the  land 
as  on  the  thirtieth  day  of  April  in  that  year,  and,  for  the  purpose 
of  ascertaining  the  value  at  that  time,  the  provisions  of  this  Act  as 
to  the  ascertainment  of  value  shall  apply  for  the  purpose  of  ascer- 
taining value  on  any  such  periodical  valuation  as  they  apply  for  the 
purpose  of  ascertaining  the  original  value  : 

Provided  that  if  on  any  such  periodical  valuation  the  valuation 
of  any  undeveloped  land  which  is  liable  to  undeveloped  land  duty 
is  for  any  reason  begun  but  not  completed  in  the  year  of  valuation, 
the  Commissioners  may  complete  the  valuation  after  the  expiration 
of  the  year  of  valuation,  subject  to  an  appeal  under  this  Act,  .  ,  , 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         417 

Part  II 
Duties  on  Liquor  Licences 
[Clauses  43-53-] 

Part  III 

Death  Duties 

^4.  Amended  Rates 

The  scale  set  out  in  the  Second  Schedule  to  this  Act^  shall,  in 
the  case  of  persons  dying  on  or  after  the  thirtieth  day  of  April 
nineteen  hundred  and  nine,  be  substituted  for  the  scale  set  out  in 
the  First  Schedule  to  the  Finance  Act,  1907,  as  the  scale  of  rates 
of  estate  duty,  and  two  per  cent  shall  be  substituted  for  one  per 
cent  in  section  seventeen  of  the  Finance  Act,  1894  (in  this  Part  of 
this  Act  referred  to  as  the  principal  Act),  as  the  rate  of  settlement 
estate  duty.  .  .  . 

Part  IV 

Income  Tax 

djj".   Income  Tax  for  igog-igio 

(i)  Income  tax  for  the  year  beginning  on  the  sixth  day  of  April 
nineteen  hundred  and  nine  shall  be  charged  at  the  rate  of  one 
shilling  and  twopence.  .  .  . 

66.  Super-fax  on  incomes  over  £,3, 000 

(i)  In  addition  to  the  income  tax  charged  at  the  rate  of  one 
shilling  and  twopence  under  this  Act,  there  shall  be  charged,  levied, 
and  paid  for  the  year  beginning  on  the  sixth  day  of  April  nineteen 
hundred  and  nine,  in  respect  of  the  income  of  any  individual,  the 

1  Cf.  infra,  p.  420. 


4l8  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

total  of  which  from  all  sources  exceeds  five  thousand  pounds,  an 
additional  duty  of  income  tax  (in  this  Act  referred  to  as  a  super-tax) 
at  the  rate  of  sixpence  for  every  pound  of  the  amount  by  which  the 
total  income  exceeds  three  thousand  pounds. 

(2)  For  the  purposes  of  the  super-tax,  the  total  income  of  any 
individual  from  all  sources  shall  be  taken  to  be  the  total  income  of 
that  individual  from  all  sources  for  the  previous  year,  estimated  in 
the  same  manner  as  the  total  income  from  all  sources  is  estimated 
for  the  purposes  of  exemptions  or  abatements  under  the  Income 
Tax  Acts ;  but,  in  estimating  the  income  of  the  previous  year  for 
the  purpose  of  super-tax,  — 

(a)  there  shall  be  deducted  in  respect  of  any  land  on  which 
income  tax  is  charged  upon  the  annual  value  estimated 
otherwise  than  in  relation  to  profits  (in  addition  to  any 
other  deduction)  any  sum  by  which  the  assessment  is  re- 
duced for  the  purposes  of  collection  under  section  thirty- 
five  of  the  Finance  Act,  1894,  or  on  which  duty  has  been 
repaid  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  relating  to  the 
repayment  of  duty  in  respect  of  the  cost  of  maintenance, 
repairs,  insurance,  and  management ;  and 
(/^)  there  shall  be  deducted  the  amount  of  any  premiums  in 
respect  of  which  relief  from  income  tax  may  be  allowed 
under  section  fifty-four  of  the  Income  Tax  Act,  1853  (as 
extended  by  any  subsequent  enactment)  ;  and 
(r)  there  shall  be  deducted  in  the  case  of  a  person  in  the  service 
of  the  Crown  abroad,  any  such  sum  as  the  Treasury  may 
allow  for  expenses  which  in  their  opinion  are  necessarily 
incidental  to  the  discharge  of  the  functions  of  his  office 
and  for  which  an  allowance  has  not  already  been  made ; 
(d)  Any  income  which  is  chargeable  with  income  tax  by  way  of 
deduction  shall  be  deemed  to  be  income  of  the  year  in 
which  it  is  receivable,  and  any  deductions  allowable  on 
account  of  any  annual  sums  paid  out  of  the  property  or 
profits  of  the  individual  shall  be  allowed  as  deductions  in 


THE  LLOYD  GEORGE  BUDGET         419 

respect  of  the  year  in  which  they  are  payable,  notwith- 
standing that  the  income  or  the  annual  sums,  as  the  case 
may  be,  accrued  in  whole  or  in  part  before  that  year.  .  .  . 


Part  V 

Stamps 

7J.   Stamp  Duty  on  Co/iveyajices  or  Transfers  on  Sales 

The  stamp  duties  chargeable  under  the  heading  "  Conveyance 
or  Transfer  on  Sale  of  any  Property  "  in  the  First  Schedule  to 
the  Stamp  Act,  189 1  (in  this  Part  of  this  Act  referred  to  as  the 
principal  Act),  shall  be  double  those  specified  in  that  Schedule  : 
Provided  that  this  section  shall  not  apply  to  the  conveyance  or 
transfer  of  any  stock  or  marketable  security  as  defined  by  section 
one  hundred  and  twenty-two  of  that  Act,  or  to  a  conveyance  or 
transfer  where  the  amount  or  value  of  the  consideration  for  the 
sale  does  not  exceed  five  hundred  pounds  and  the  instrument  con- 
tains a  statement  certifying  that  the  transaction  thereby  effected 
does  not  form  part  of  a  larger  transaction  or  of  a  series  of  trans- 
actions in  respect  of  which  the  amount  or  value,  or  the  aggregate 
amount  or  value,  of  the  consideration  exceeds  five  hundred  pounds. 

7^.  Stamp  Duty  on  Gifts  Inter  Vivos 

(i)  Any  conveyance  or  transfer  operating  as  a  voluntary  dispo- 
sition inter  vivos  shall  be  chargeable  with  the  like  stamp  duty  as 
if  it  were  a  conveyance  or  transfer  on  sale,  with  the  substitution 
in  each  case  of  the  value  of  the  property  conveyed  or  transferred 
for  the  amount  or  value  of  the  consideration  for  the  sale : 

Provided  that  this  section  shall  not  apply  to  a  conveyance  or 
transfer  operating  as  a  voluntary  disposition  of  property  to  a  body 
of  persons  incorporated  by  a  special  Act,  if  that  body  is  by  its 
Act  precluded  from  dividing  any  profit  among  its  members  and 


420 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


the  property  conveyed  is  to  be  held  for  the  purposes  of  an  open 
space  or  for  the  purposes  of  its  preservation  for  the  benefit  of  the 
nation.   .  .  . 

[Part  VI  (clauses  80-86)  treats  of  Customs  and  Excise  other 
than  Liquor  Licence  duties,  such  as  tobacco,  motor  spirits  and 
special  taxes  on  beer;  Part  VII  (clauses  87-91)  provides  for 
payments  to  local  authorities  and  to  the  road  improvement  ac- 
count;  Part  VIII  (clauses  92-96)  is  general  and  supplementary. 
Six  schedules  accompany  the  Act.] 


Second  Schedule 
Scale  of  Rates  of  Estate  Duty 


Estate  Duty  shall 

Where  the  Principal  Value  of  the 

Estate 

BE    payable   at  the 

Rate  per  Cent  of 

£ 

£ 

Exceeds 

100  and  does  not  exceed 

500      . 

I 

" 

500    " 

1,000 

2 

« 

1,000    "        ' 

5,000 

3 

« 

5,000    "        ' 

10,000 

4 

« 

10,000    "        ' 

20,000 

5 

«t 

20,000    "        ' 

40,000 

6 

n 

40,000    "        ' 

70,000 

7 

«« 

70,000    "        ' 

100,000 

8 

«t 

100,000    "        ' 

150,000 

9 

« 

150,000    "        ' 

200,000 

10 

«« 

200,000    "        ' 

400,000 

II 

<» 

400,000    "        ' 

600,000 

12 

« 

600,000    "        ' 

800,000 

13 

" 

800,000    "        ' 

1,000,000 

14 

" 

1 ,000,000 

15 

CHAPTER  IX 

CURBING  THE  LORDS 

[The  House  of  Lords  with  its  overwhelming  Conservative  ma- 
jority offered  for  several  years  after  1905  a  serious  check  upon 
the  legislative  programme  of  the  Liberal  Government.  In  1906 
the  Lords  rejected  important  governmental  measures  dealing  with 
education,  licensing,  and  plural  voting,  and  subsequently  displayed 
no  little  opposition  to  various  proposals  for  social  reform.  The 
social  problem  in  Great  Britain  was  thus  complicated  by  a  political 
and  constitutional  question  as  to  the  relations  between  the  Houses 
of  Parliament. 

This  situation  the  Liberals  grasped  at  once ;  and  as  early  as 
June  24,  1907,  Sir  Henry  Campbell- Bannerman,  as  Premier,  pre- 
sented a  resolution  in  the  House  of  Commons,  "  That,  in  order  to 
give  effect  to  the  will  of  the  people  as  expressed  by  their  elected 
representatives,  it  is  necessary  that  the  power  of  the  other  House 
to  alter  or  reject  Bills  passed  by  this  House  should  be  so  restricted 
by  law  as  to  secure  that  within  the  limits  of  a  single  Parliament 
the  final  decision  of  the  Commons  shall  prevail."  The  debate  on 
this  resolution,  which  brought  out  the  most  salient  features  of  the 
constitutional  and  political  issue,  is  reproduced,  in  part,  below  : 
Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman's  explanation  and  defence  of 
the  proposal  (^Extract  yi) ;  Mr.  Arthur  J.  Balfour's  opposition 
in  behalf  of  the  Conservatives  (^Extract  ^2)  ;  the  attack  of  Mr. 
D.  Shackleton,  a  Labour  Member,  upon  the  undemocratic  char- 
acter of  the  House  of  Lords  (^Extract  yj) ;  the  scholarly  defence 
of  a  Second  Chamber  by  Sir  William  Anson,  representing  Oxford 
University  and  an  acknowledged  authority  on  the  constitutional 

421 


422  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

history  of  England  {Extract  y^) ;  a  clear  exposition  of  the  issue 
both  between  the  Houses  and  between  the  Parties,  by  Mr.  Winston 
Churchill  {Extract  ^j) ;  and  Mr.  David  Lloyd  George's  scathing 
arraignment  of  the  Upper  House  {Extract  yd).  The  resolution 
was  carried  by  432  votes  to  147. 

Lord  Rosebery.  and  other  prominent  members  of  the  Upper 
House  had  long  advocated  some  kind  of  reform  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  their  House;  and  in  1907  they  succeeded  in  securing  the 
appointment  of  a  Select  Committee.  This  Committee,  in  a  lengthy 
report  published  on  December  3,  1908,  proposed  to  distinguish 
between  Peers  and  "  Lords  of  Parliament "  or  Members  of  the 
House  of  Lords ;  and  recommended  that,  except  in  case  of  a  Peer 
of  the  Blood  Royal,  a  peerage  should  not  entitle  one  to  a  seat  in 
that  House.  The  hereditary  Peers,  including  those  of  Scotland 
and  Ireland,  should  be  entitled  to  elect  200  representatives  to  sit 
in  that  House  for  each  Parliament,  this  election  being  conducted 
by  a  form  of  cumulative  voting.  The  Archbishops  should  hold 
seats  as  of  right,  the  Bishops  should  elect  eight  representatives. 
The  Committee  would  gladly  see  representatives  of  the  other  great 
Churches  in  the  House,  but  could  formulate  no  recommendation. 
Official  representatives  of  the  great  self-governing  Colonies  might 
be  introduced  into  the  House  without  the  danger  of  involving  the 
Colonies  in  British  party  politics  ;  as  to  the  representation  of  India, 
they  could  formulate  no  specific  recommendation,  but  thought  its  in- 
terest would  be  secured  by  the  presence  of  ex-Viceroys  and  other 
qualified  persons  in  the  House.  Besides  the  elective  Peers,  any 
Peer  should  be  entitled  to  sit  in  the  House  who  had  been  Cabinet 
Minister,  Viceroy  of  India,  Governor-General  of  Canada  or  Aus- 
tralia, High  Commissioner  for  South  Africa,  or  Lord-Lieutenant 
of  Ireland,  or  who  had  held  any  of  certain  Colonial  Governorships 
or  high  offices  or  had  been  Lieutenant-General  or  Vice- Admiral  on 
the  active  list,  or  had  sat  for  a  certain  period  in  the  Commons. 
This  recommendation  would  add  about  130  Peers  to  the  House. 
The  Crown  should   be  empowered   to  summon  four  life   Peers 


CURBING  THE  LORDS  423 

annually,  the  total  not  to  exceed  forty.  This  would  give  a  House 
of  somewhat  less  than  400,  as  against  the  existing  number  of 
considerably  over  600.  Among  many  other  interesting  items  the 
Report  stated  that  proposals  had  been  discussed  to  admit  elected 
representatives  from  County  Councils  and  Municipal  Corporations, 
whether  Peers  or  not,  but  that  the  Committee,  being  almost  equally 
divided,  made  no  recommendation. 

On  the  report  of  the  Select  Committee  on  the  reform  of  their 
own  House,  the  Lords  took  no  action  during  the  year  1909.  But 
as  the  year  advanced,  it  became  increasingly  clear  to  the  Liberal 
Government  that  they  themselves  must  endeavour  to  solve  the 
difficulties  between  the  Houses  of  Parliament  by  drastic  legisla- 
tive application  of  the  Campbell-Bannerman  Resolution  of  1907. 
To  have  one  political  party  dominant  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  another  in  the  House  of  Lords,  was  not  only  an  anomaly, 
but  a  serious  impediment  to  constructive  legislation.  In  1909,  it 
will  be  remembered,  the  Upper  House  weakened  the  Housing, 
Town  Planning,  and  Development  Acts  and  rejected  altogether 
the  Lloyd  George  Budget.^  That  rejection  of  the  financial  measure 
for  the  year  —  usurpation,  the  Liberals  called  it  —  was  the  imme- 
diate occasion  for  the  break  between  the  two  Houses. 

What  would  be  the  outcome  ?  Lord  Rosebery,  supporting  the 
Select  Committee  of  the  House  of  Lords,  had  one  solution  to  sug- 
gest ;  Mr.  Asquith's  Government  had  another.  The  majority  of 
the  LIpper  House  naturally  hoped  that  the  elections  of  January, 
19 10,  which  so  closely  followed  the  rejection  of  the  Pludget,  would 
restore  their  Conservative  friends  to  power  in  the  Lower  House, 
in  which  case  any  radical  parliamentary  reform  would  be  quite  un- 
necessary. But  their  hopes  were  doomed  to  disappointment  ^  ;  and 
when  Mr.  Asquith  met  his  new  Parliament  in  19 10  he  declared 
that  not  only  would  the  passage  of  the  Budget  now  be  insisted 
upon,  but  also  a  definite  settlement  of  the  constitutional  question 
along  the  lines  laid  down  in  the  Commons  Resolution  of  1907. 

1  Cf.  supra,  chs.  vii,  viii.  2  cf.  supra,  p.  360. 


424  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Lord  Rosebery  determined  to  anticipate  the  Government's  ac- 
tion. On  February  24,  19 10,  he  gave  notice  that  on  March  14 
he  would  move  that  the  House  of  Lords  resolve  itself  into  com- 
mittee to  consider  the  best  means  for  so  reforming  its  organisation 
as  to  constitute  it  a  strong  and  eflficient  Second  Chamber.  On 
March  12  a  report  was  published  of  the  numbers  and  services 
of  temporal  Peers.  Eighteen  had  held  high  judicial  office  ;  forty- 
three  had  been  Cabinet  Ministers  or  Parliamentary  heads  of  Gov- 
ernment departments,  or  Speakers  of  the  Commons ;  twenty 
had  been  Lords-Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  Viceroys  of  India,  or  Gov- 
ernors-General of  Canada,  Australia,  or  the  South  African  Union ; 
twenty-four  had  been  Governors  of  Dominions,  Colonies,  Indian 
Presidencies  or  Provinces,  or  High  Commissioners  of  South  Africa ; 
fifty-one  had  held  minor  Ministerial  offices  ;  two  had  been  Ministers 
or  Ambassadors  to  foreign  Powers ;  1 48  had  sat  in  the  Commons, 
and  seven  had  attained  the  rank  of  Vice-Admiral  or  Lieutenant- 
General.  The  number  of  Peers  on  the  roll  at  the  beginning  of 
the  session  in  1765  was  202;  in  1835,  423;  in  1865,  454;  in 
1885,  524;  in  igoo,  593  ;  in  1906,  613  ;  and  at  the  time  of  issu- 
ing the  return  it  was  622,  of  whom  four  were  Royal,  twenty-six 
Episcopal,  and  five  life  Peers.  In  1909  eighty-one  out  of  a  total 
of  589  temporal  Peers  (including  minors  and  Peers  kept  away  by 
their  official  duties  or  by  ill-health)  did  not  attend,  and  168  attended 
less  than  ten  times. 

The  debate  on  Lord  Rosebery's  Resolutions  extended  from 
March  1 4  to  March  2  i ,  when  they  were  carried  by  substantial  ma- 
jorities, and  served  to  bring  out  the  chief  arguments  on  both  sides. 
The  Earl  of  Rosebery,  in  introducing  the  subject,  stated  that  since 
his  reform  proposals  of  1888  he  had  expected  real  reform  in  the 
House  of  Lords  to  come  from  outside ;  but  it  was  now  thought 
better  that  it  should  be  proposed  from  some  neutral  .source  within 
the  House  in  which  there  had  long  been  a  consciousness  of  its  im- 
perfections —  its  excessive  numbers,  its  exclusive  representation 
of  a  class,  and  its  basis  in  heredity.    It  had  splendid  traditions  and, 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  425 

according  to  Freeman,  was  the  lineal  descendant  of  the  Witenage- 
mot;  even  Mr.  Redmond  had  eulogised  it  in  1894.  Of  the  various 
efforts  at  reform  from  within,  Lord  Newton's  Committee  alone  had 
reached  a  definite  conclusion  and  the  general  election  had  returned 
a  hostile  majority  of  125.  The  Irish  and  Labour  parties  respectively 
were  hostile  for  the  sake  of  Home  Rule  and  of  nationalisation 
schemes,  but  Scotland  and  the  North  of  England  had  an  insuper- 
able objection  to  the  hereditary  principle.  The  Government  plan 
would  first  disable  the  House  and  then  reconstitute  it,  but  the 
reconstitution  would  never  be  agreed  to  by  the  more  advanced  ele- 
ments ;  the  plan  was  like  hamstringing  a  horse  and  then  starting 
him  for  the  Derby.  After  citing  Cromwell's  famous  condemnation 
of  single-chamber  Government,  he  asked  what  self-respecting  per- 
son would  care  to  sit  in  the  House  which  the  Government  would 
some  day  propose  to  re-establish  ?  There  would  be  a  violent  reac- 
tion and  a  demand  for  a  House  of  Lords  stronger  than  the  present 
one ;  but  meanwhile  a  Home  Rule  Bill  might  be  passed,  and  the 
country  might  be  at  the  mercy  of  a  momentary  ebullition  of  feeling. 
The  Second  Chamber  would  secure  that  the  voice  of  the  people 
should  be  deliberate.  Revolutions  in  history  had  been  carried  by 
small  and  determined  minorities.  The  Greater  Britains,  who  had 
been  provided  with  strong  Second  Chambers,  would  lose  faith  in 
England  if  single-chamber  Government  were  established ;  strong 
Senates  had  been  deliberately  established  in  France  and  the  United 
States  ;  the  only  two  Single-Chamber  States  were  Greece  and  Costa 
Rica.  It  was  felt  better  to  proceed  by  resolutions,  as  a  basis  for  a 
Bill  to  be  framed  by  some  future  Government.  The  Peers  might 
now  do  the  country  a  service  greater  than  any  since  that  of  the 
Barons  at  Runnymede,  or  they  might  cling  to  obsolete  privileges 
and  await  in  decrepitude  their  doom.  But  he  had  confidence  in 
their  action. 

Lord  Morley  of  Blackburn,  replying  to  Lord  Rosebery,  distrusted 
historical  and  colonial  analogies  ;  in  Canada  and  Australia  the  Sec- 
ond Chamber  was  nominated.    Lord  Rosebery  had  not  come  even 


426  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

to  the  fringe  of  the  existing  emergency.  It  would  have  been  better 
to  await  the  proposals  of  the  Government.  In  November,  1909, 
the  Lords  rejected  the  Budget,  and  were  held  up  as  a  model  of 
political  virtue ;  now,  having  killed  the  Budget,  they  were  com- 
mitting suicide  by  declaring  their  unfitness.  The  Government 
thought  it  inexpedient  to  discuss  proposals  for  reform  until  an  ef- 
fective method  had  been  provided  for  settling  disputes  between  the 
Houses.  The  question  had  been  raised  by  a  practical  emergency ; 
the  gulf  between  the  Houses  had  widened  and  deepened  since 
1894,  and  great  changes  had  become  inevitable.  To  make  a  "  strong 
and  efficient "  Second  Chamber  would  be  to  take  back  part  of  the 
electoral  power  established  by  the  Liberals  and  to  intensify  friction; 
reform  would  not  remove  the  grievance  that  that  House  did  not 
receive  Bills  in  time  to  debate  them  ;  the  changes  proposed  would 
not  free  the  House  from  the  imputation  of  class  prejudice,  and 
there  was  no  provision  for  removing  or  diminishing  deadlocks.  He 
applied  to  Lord  Rosebery  his  own  description  of  "  the  riddle  that 
perplexed  Cromwell" — "  Like  smaller  reformers  since,  he  had  never 
decided  to  begin  with,  whether  to  make  his  Lords  strong  or  weak  ; 
strong  enough  to  curb  the  Commons,  and  yet  weak  enough  for  the 
Commons  to  curb  them." 

The  Earl  of  Onslow,  speaking  next,  desired  a  Second  Chamber 
based  on  the  House  of  Lords,  with  some  representation  of  the  Do- 
minions overseas ;  this  latter  proposal  was  unfavourably  criticised  by 
Lord  Northcote.  Of  subsequent  speakers  some  favoured  reform ; 
among  them  Earl  Cawder,  who  desired  the  retention  of  a  large 
hereditary  element  and  maintained  that  on  Home  Rule,  the  Edu- 
cation Bill,  the  Licensing  Bill,  and  the  Budget,  the  Lords  repre- 
sented the  minds  of  the  people  better  than  the  Commons.  Earl 
Carrington  laid  stress  on  the  deadlock  between  the  Houses,  which 
Lord  Rosebery's  proposal  did  nothing  to  diminish.  On  this  ques- 
tion he  declared  that  the  Government  were  ready  to  lead  the  whole 
progressive  party,  and  on  its  decision  to  stand  or  fall. 

On  behalf  of  his  Government,  Mr,  H.  H.  Asquith  introduced 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  427 

the  main  features  of  the  proposed  Parliament  Bill  under  the  form 
of  Resolutions  in  the  House  of  Commons  on  March  29,  19 10.  He 
began  by  noting  the  advance  of  the  question  since  June  24,  1907, 
as  marked  by  the  rejection  of  the  Finance  Bill ;  the  general  election, 
at  which  the  relations  of  the  two  Houses  constituted  at  least  a  lead- 
ing issue ;  and  the  spontaneous  movement  of  the  House  of  Lords 
towards  its  own  reform.  His  motion  assumed  that  two  Cham- 
bers were  necessary- ;  but  Great  Britain  did  not  possess  a  truly 
bi-cameral  system.  The  Commons  must  predominate ;  but  a  Sec- 
ond Chamber  might  usefully  discharge  the  functions  of  consulta- 
tion, of  revision,  and,  subject  to  proper  safeguards,  of  delay.  Such 
a  Chamber  should  be  relatively  small ;  its  basis  should  be  demo- 
cratic, not  hereditary ;  it  must  not  be  "  governed  by  partisanship 
tempered  by  panic,"  and  should  be  representative  of  and  dependent 
on  the  will  of  the  nation.  The  Government  resolutions,  therefore, 
were  not  put  forward  as  a  final  or  adequate  solution.  Meanwhile, 
however,  they  had  to  deal  with  the  House  of  Lords  as  it  wa,s.  The 
resolutions  to  be  moved  in  Committee  ^  were  not  to  be  treated  as 
clauses  in  a  Bill,  but  as  basis  for  a  Bill.  The  first  he  justified  by 
citations  from  Pitt,  Lord  Rosebeiy,  Lord  Salisbury,  and  Mr.  Bal- 
four, and  explained  that  tacking,  a  purely  speculative  possibility,  was 
guarded  against  by  entrusting  to  the  Speaker  the  decision  as  to  what 
was  or  was  not  a  Money  Bill.  He  should  strongly  deprecate  leaving 
the  decision  to  the  Law  Courts.  The  second  resolution  provided 
a  new  remedy  for  a  deadlock  between  the  two  Houses.  But  for 
the  right  of  the  Crown  to  create  new  Peers  —  which  he  defended, 
amid  some  Opposition  protests,  by  citations  from  Erskine,  May, 
Dicey,  and  Bagehot  —  there  was  now  no  way  out  of  such  a  dead- 
lock ;  and  the  resolution  passed  in  the  Lords  that  a  Peer  should  not 
necessarily  have  the  right  to  sit  and  vote  in  the  Upper  House  would 
deal  a  fatal  blow  at  the  Royal  Prerogative.  Apart  from  this  power, 
which  should  be  exercised  only  in  extreme  cases,  but  then  without 
fear,  there  were  only  two  possible  checks  on  the  Upper  House : 

1  Cf.  the  provisions  of  the  Act,  infra,  p.  474. 


428  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

(i)  The  referendum,  which  he  had  formerly  been  inclined  to 
favour,  would  be  unsuited  for  cases  where  the  two  Houses  agreed 
unless  it  were  accompanied  by  some  power  of  initiative ;  it  would 
tend  to  undermine  the  responsibility  and  dependence  of  the  Com- 
mons and  would  not  really  be  confined  to  a  single  issue.  (2)  A 
joint  sitting  of  the  two  Houses  would  not  be  applicable  with  the 
existing  House  of  Lords.  The  Government  proposal  as  to  the 
Lords'  Veto  had  been  recommended  in  a  more  drastic  form  by  John 
Bright  in  a  speech  at  Birmingham  on  August  4,  1884.  Sir  Henry 
Campbell- Bannerman  had  modified  it ;  the  Government  had  carried 
the  modification  farther  and  coupled  with  it  the  limitation  of  the 
term  of  Parliament  to  five  years.  After  replying  at  length  to  the 
argument  that  its  adoption  would  mean  single-chamber  government, 
Mr.  Asquith  eloquently  described  how  the  forms  of  the  Constitution 
had  been  adapted  to  modern  needs.  Queen  Elizabeth  in  one  session 
vetoed  forty-eight  Bills  out  of  ninety -one ;  but  the  Veto  of  the  Sov- 
ereign was  dead,  yet  the  Monarchy  was  far  more  secure  than  under 
the  Tudors.  But  one  sterilising  factor  in  the  Constitution  still  re- 
mained :  the  absolute  Veto  of  the  House  of  Lords ;  it  must  go,  as 
the  Veto  of  the  Crown  had  gone. 

Mr.  Arthur  J.  Balfour,  replying  in  behalf  of  the  Opposition,  ban- 
tered the  Government  on  the  divergence  of  views  among  their 
supporters.  The  Prime  Minister  had  settled  clown  to  a  moderate 
approval  of  the  functions  of  a  Second  Chamber,  provided  it  had  no 
real  power ;  Sir  Edward  Grey  and  the  Home  Secretary'  each  took 
a  different  view ;  some  Ministerialists  desired  to  abolish  it  alto- 
gether ;  and,  probably  owing  to  its  divergence,  the  Government  had 
brought  forward  proposals  which  would  neither  mend  the  evils  of  the 
Second  Chamber  nor  end  them.  If  the  House  of  Lords  were  unfit 
for  its  functions,  reform  it ;  but  the  Government  could  not  agree 
on  a  reform.  That  it  delayed  the  legislation  of  a  revolutionary  Gov- 
ernment was  not  surprising,  but  there  was  no  deadlock.  Since  Mr. 
Bright's  speech  of  1884  it  had  been  shown  that  the  House  of  Lords 
alone  stood  between  the  country  and  great  constitutional  changes 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  429 

of  which  the  country  profoundly  disapproved.  Alone  among  the 
great  countries  of  the  world,  we  had  no  written  Constitution  and 
no  safeguards  against  violent  changes.  It  was  absurd  to  put  disso- 
lution and  the  creation  of  Peers  on  a  par.  The  proposal  was  an 
absurd  experiment  in  Constitution  making ;  the  House  of  Lords 
had,  and  ought  to  have,  the  power  to  reject  Money  Piills.  To  make 
the  Speaker  the  judge  of  tacking  would  make  him  in  a  sense  the 
author  of  legislation,  and  there  was  a  kind  of  virtual  tacking,  by 
bringing  in  Money  Bills  for  other  than  money  objects,  on  which  his 
opinion  would  not  be  asked.  In  all  great  free  self-governing  com- 
munities there  were  safeguards,  insuring  that  measures  could  be 
referred  to  the  electors.  Moreover,  if  the  Finance  Bill  were  voted 
on  simply  upon  its  merits,  everyone  knew  it  would  be  rejected.  It 
was  therefore  absurd  to  say  that  the  House  of  Lords  had  misused 
its  admittedly  very  delicate  function  as  to  Money  Bills.  The  Gov- 
ernment scheme  under  the  second  resolution  would  divide  the  life  of 
a  Parliament  into  a  single-chamber  period  —  "  like  Costa  Rica  "  — 
and  a  two-chamber  period.  It  would  be  a  piebald,  harlequin  Con- 
stitution ;  it  was  really  the  coming  election  —  not  the  past  one  — 
that  influenced  a  House  of  Commons.  The  Government  under 
this  scheme  would  bring  in  all  their  great  measures  early  and  would 
never  be  able  to  improve  them.  The  scheme  could  not  survive,  and 
would  initiate  a  Constitutional  controversy  which  would  be  fatal  to 
all  plans  of  social  reform. 

Mr.  John  Redmond,  the  leader  of  the  Irish  Nationalists,  on  whom, 
as  well  as  upon  the  Labour  Members,  the  Government  must  now 
rely  for  support,  described  Mr.  Balfour's  speech  as  amusing,  but 
not  serious.  He  enumerated  a  number  of  Irish  Bills,  from  Catholic 
emancipation  onwards,  which  the  House  of  Lords  had  treated  in  a 
way  prejudicial  to  Ireland,  and  assured  the  Government  of  his  hearty 
support  of  the  resolutions.  He  could  not  support  a  reform  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  as  it  would  tend  to  strengthen  it.  A  settlement  of  a 
deadlock  by  a  Referendum  Bill  would  bring  them  back  to  the  Royal 
prerogative.    After  commenting  on  Lord  Rosebery's  denunciation 


430  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  the  action  of  the  House  of  Lords  and  of  the  idea  of  reforming 
it  in  1894,  he  expressed  regret  that  the  resolutions  had  not  been  be- 
fore the  country  at  the  election  and  urged  the  Government  to  press 
on  with  them.  If  the  Lords  rejected  them,  let  the  Prime  Minister 
ask  for  an  assurance  from  the  Crown  that  Peers  would  be  created, 
and,  if  the  request  were  refused,  let  him  go  to  the  country  at  once. 

Mr.  Asquith's  resolution  was  agreed  to  on  April  4,  19 10.  The 
majority  was  composed  of  256  Liberals,  34  Labour  Members,  and 
67  Nationalists.    None  but  Unionists  were  in  the  minority. 

The  Bill  founded  on  the  resolutions  was  introduced  by  Mr. 
Asquith  on  April  14,  19 10.  Subsequently  he  explained  that  if  the 
Lords  rejected  or  declined  to  consider  the  Government  policy,  the 
Ministers  would  either  resign  or  recommend  a  dissolution,  and 
would  not  recommend  a  dissolution  except  under  such  conditions 
as  to  insure  that  in  the  new  Parliament  the  judgment  of  the  people 
as  expressed  at  the  election  would  be  carried  into  law. 

The  progress  of  the  Parliament  Bill  was  temporarily  delayed  on 
account  of  the  death  of  King  Edward  VII  on  May  6,  19 10,  and 
the  accession  of  King  George  V.  It  was  generally  felt  that  it 
would  be  unfair  to  lay  the  burden  of  deciding  whether  or  not  to 
override  the  resistance  of  the  Peers  on  the  new  King  at  the.  outset 
of  his  reign,  and  that  in  any  case  the  controversy,  though  it  could 
not  be  dropped,  would  have  to  be  approached  with  an  increasing 
readiness  for  a  setdement.  On  June  8,  the  day  fixed  for  the 
reassembling  of  Parliament,  it  was  announced  that  the  Ministry 
were  ready  to  propose  a  small  private  conference  between  them- 
selves and  the  Unionist  leaders.  Though  not  favourably  received 
by  the  extremists  on  either  side,  the  proposal  was  welcomed  by  the 
moderates  of  both  parties. 

On  June  16  the  Conference  was  formally  decided  upon  by  the 
leaders  on  both  sides,  and  next  day  it  held  its  first  meeting  in  the 
Prime  Minister's  room,  behind  the  Speaker's  Chair  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  It  numbered  eight  members  —  Mr.  H.  H.  Asquith, 
Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  the  Earl  of  Crewe,  and  Mr.  Augustine 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  43  I 

Birrell,  representing  the  Government,  and  Mr.  Arthur  J.  Balfour, 
the  Marquess  of  Lansdowne,  Earl  Cawder,  and  Mr.  Austen  Cham- 
berlain, the  Opposition.  An  official  statement  was  issued  that  the 
negotiations  were  entirely  untrammelled  and  the  proceedings  would 
throughout  be  strictly  confidential.  Advanced  Liberal  and  Labour 
opinions  continued  unfavourable,  however ;  so  was  the  main  body 
of  the  Nationalists.  Twenty-one  meetings  of  the  Constitutional 
Conference  were  held  during  the  summer  and  autumn.  At  length, 
on  November  10,  the  Prime  Minister  announced  its  complete 
failure  and  stated  that,  so  far  as  the  Government  were  concerned, 
another  general  election  would  be  necessary  in  December. 

The  centre  of  interest  then  shifted  to  the  House  of  Lords.  On 
November  21,  19 10,  the  Earl  of  Crewe,  in  behalf  of  the  Govern- 
ment, moved  the  second  reading  of  the  Parliament  Bill,  setting 
forth  in  outline  the  controversy  between  the  two  Houses  opened 
by  the  Education  Bill  of  1906  and  presenting  an  analysis  of  its 
provisions  {Extract  77).  The  Marquess  of  Lansdowne  expressed 
strong  opposition  to  the  Bill  in  principle  and  in  detail  (Extract  y8).  ■ 
In  the  subsequent  debate,  the  Earl  of  Rosebery  complained  {Ex- 
tract 7p)  that  the  House  was  regarded  simply  as  a  condemned 
criminal  without  the  usual  indulgences.  The  Lord  Chancellor  asked 
why  Lord  Rosebery  or  some  other  Peer  had  not  brought  forward 
some  definite  plan  earlier  {Extract  80). 

The  Peers  would  hardly  feel  inclined  to  go  to  the  country  on  the 
question  of  the  Veto  without  an  alternative  proposal  to  the  Govern- 
ment's Parliament  Bill.  Therefore,  on  November  23,  the  Marquess 
of  Lansdowne  presented  to  the  House  of  Lords  the  Opposition 
Scheme  in  the  form  of  resolutions  {Extract  81).  Among  the  sup- 
porters of  these  resolutions  was  Lord  Ribblesdale  {Extract  82). 
They  were  at  once  passed,  the  Ministers  holding  aloof,  and  com- 
municated to  the  House  of  Commons.  The  deadlock  between  the 
Houses  and  between  the  Parties  was  complete. 

The  Parliamentary  session  of  19 10  was  now  virtually  over,  and 
the  interest  lay  in  the  constituencies.    The  Ministerial  case  was 


432  BRITISPi   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

effectively  restated  by  the  Prime  Minister  at  Hull  on  November  25, 
before  an  audience  of  3000,  after  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Na- 
tional Liberal  Federation,  which  had  concentrated  its  attention  on 
the  Veto.  Mr.  Asquith  first  replied  at  length  to  the  charge  that 
the  election  was  being  rushed  in  order  to  set  up  single-chamber 
government.  The  Veto  had  been  the  dominant  issue  at  the  January 
election  ;  the  Peers  had  then  no  alternative  policy ;  the  King's 
death  had  prevented  the  fulfilment  of  his  own  promise  ;  the  failure 
of  the  Conference  had  necessitated  a  dissolution.  It  was  said  that 
the  Government  were  hurrying  on  a  dissolution  to  prevent  the 
Lords  from  presenting  their  case  and  to  avoid  submitting  the 
Budget  to  the  Commons,  and  Lord  Lansdowne's  call  for  the  Par- 
liament Bill  was  supposed  to  have  defeated  the  manoeuvre.  But 
before  Parliament  reassembled  the  Government  had  decided  to 
present  the  essential  features  of  the  Budget  to  it,  and  to  give  the 
Peers  full  opportunity  to  criticise  the  Government's  proposals  on 
the  Veto,  or  to  present  their  own.  The  dissolution  was  undertaken 
to  settle  the  question  before  proceeding  with  Liberal  legislation. 
An  adverse  vote  would  bring  Protection  disguised  as  Tariff  Re- 
form ;  but  he  preferred  to  concentrate  his  criticism  on  Lord 
Lansdowne's  "  crude  and  complex  "  scheme.  He  did  not  believe 
the  "  backwoods  Peers "  or  a  Tory  majority  in  the  House  of 
Commons  would  accept  it,  and  he  insisted  especially  on  the  obscu- 
rity of  its  details,  the  sacrifice  of  the  Royal  power  to  create  Peers, 
the  uncertainty  as  to  the  numbers  of  the  new  House,  and  the 
indefiniteness  of  the  term  "  questions  of  great  gravity."  He  ob- 
jected to  the  referendum  on  three  grounds :  it  would  enable  the 
House  of  Lords  to  enforce  what  would  virtually  be  a  general  elec- 
tion —  and,  if  the  Ministr)'  were  beaten,  there  would  be  a  general 
election  besides ;  it  would  destroy  the  Parliamentar)'  sense  of  respon- 
sibility, and  therefore  representative  government.  The  Ministerial 
scheme  was  not  a  scheme  for  single-chamber  government  and  was 
not  final ;  it  was  the  minimum  neccssar)^  to  get  on  with  the  Liberal 
programme,  which  he  had  stated  at  the  Albert  Hall  in  1909.    He 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  433 

saw  no  cause  for  shame  in  the  givers  or  takers  of  American  dollars  ; 
and,  in  securing  self-government  for  Ireland  and  afterwards  lighten- 
ing the  work  of  Parliament,  the  Government  should  have  the  sym- 
pathy of  the  Dominions,  who  had  learned  how  easy  it  was  to  combine 
local  autonomy  and  Imperial  loyalty.  But  the  immediate  task  was 
to  secure  fair  play  for  Liberal  legislation  and  popular  government. 

The  Unionist  case  was  put  on  the  same  evening  by  Lord  Lans- 
downe  at  a  demonstration  held  at  Glasgow  after  the  annual  meet- 
ing of  the  Liberal  Unionist  Council.  After  regretting  that  the  Con- 
ference had  not  made  for  a  reasonable  settlement,  he  ridiculed  the 
contention  that  the  conflict  was  "  Peers  against  People."  The  last 
four  Liberal  Ministries  had  created  136  Peers;  the  Liberal  Peers 
now  numbered  only  120.  Of  about  230  Ministerial  measures 
introduced  since  January,  1906,  the  House  of  Lords  had  rejected 
only  six.  He  mentioned  nine  of  first-class  importance  that  had 
become  law  and  referred  to  Lord  Carrington's  eulogy  of  Liberal 
achievement.  After  defending  at  length  the  Lords'  action  on  the 
F.ducation,  Licensing,  and  Finance  Bills,  he  asked.  Why  was  their 
interference  regarded  with  jealousy  ?  Many  people  held  that  the 
hereditary  principle  was  anomalous ;  but  moderate  men  would  say 
that  in  Great  Britain,  especially  at  present,  a  real  Second  Chamber 
was  needed.  Ministers  began  at  the  wrong  end ;  they  abused  the 
House  of  Lords,  but  would  not  touch  its  reform.  He  outlined  and 
upheld  the  alternative  policy  of  his  resolutions,  and  thought  the  out- 
line might  be  filled  up  satisfactorily,  but  the  Government  refused 
to  discuss  it.  The  issue  was  between  reform  and  revolution.  He 
reaffirmed  Tariff  Reform  and  the  LTnionist  land  policy. 

Parliament  was  prorogued,  preparatory  to  its  dissolution,  on 
November  28  ;  and  the  candidates  for  the  House  issued  their 
customary  appeals  to  constituents.  Mr.  Balfour's  declared  that 
"  behind  the  single-chamber  conspiracy  lurk  Socialism  and  Home 
Rule."  Mr.  Asquith's  said  that  the  appeal  to  the  country  was 
almost  narrowed  to  a  single  issue,  and  on  its  determination  hung 
the  whole  future  of  democratic  government. 


434  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

The  general  election  which  extended  over  the  period  from 
December  2  to  December  20  returned  272  Liberals,  42  Labour 
Members,  76  Nationalists,  8  Independent  Nationalists,  —  398  Min- 
isterials,  —  and  271  Unionists.  On  the  whole,  the  result  was  much 
the  same  as  in  January.  In  London  the  Liberals  had  gained  a 
little ;  in  Scotland  the  Unionists  had  slightly  strengthened  their 
position.  Speaking  broadly,  industrial  England  returned  Ministe- 
rialists, except  the  Birmingham  area,  while  the  chief  ports,  except 
London,  Liverpool,  and  Plymouth,  and  also  the  pleasure  and  resi- 
dential towns  and  districts  were  Unionist.  Class  cleavage  had 
increased. 

The  motion  for  leave  to  introduce  the  Parliament  Bill  in  the 
new  House  of  Commons  was  made  by  the  Prime  Minister  on 
February  21,  191 1,  and  the  next  day  it  passed  first  reading  by  351 
votes  to  227.  Second  reading  was  passed  amid  noisy  demonstra- 
tions on  March  2  by  366  to  243.  Some  nine  hundred  amendments, 
most  of  which  had  been  offered  by  Unionists,  were  considered  dur- 
ing Committee  and  Report  stages  from  April  3  to  May  10.  On 
May  15  the  final  effort  of  the  Unionists  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons to  reject  the  Bill  was  frustrated  by  a  vote  of  363  to  243, 
and  the  third  reading  carried  by  362  to  241. 

The  Bill  had  been  somewhat  modified  in  its  passage  through 
the  Commons.  It  had  been  made  clear  that  it  did  not  apply  to 
private  Bills ;  the  wording  of  the  clause  relating  to  Money  Bills 
had  been  made  more  precise,  and  the  Bills  relating  to  the  raising 
of  money  by  local  authorities  for  local  purposes  had  been  ex- 
pressly excluded ;  the  certificate  of  the  Speaker  was  required  to 
be  endorsed  on  all  Money  Bills  when  sent  up  to  the  Lords  and 
presented  for  the  royal  assent,  but  the  prohibition  was  struck  out 
prohibiting  any  amendment  which,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Speaker, 
would  prevent  the  Bill  from  remaining  a  Money  Bill.  The  two 
years'  period  was  to  run  from  the  second  reading  in  the  first  ses- 
sion to  the  passing  the  Commons  in  the  third  session,  and  amend- 
ments certified  by  the  Speaker  to  have  been  made  by  the  House 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  435 

of  Lords  in  the  third  session  and  approved  by  the  Commons 
were  to  form  part  of  the  Bill  in  question  when  presented  for  the 
royal  assent. 

In  the  House  of  Lords,  the  Parliament  Bill  now  speedily  passed 
first  and  second  reading,  the  real  struggle  being  deferred  by  the 
Conservative  Peers  until  after  the  coronation.  But  in  July  the 
struggle  became  acute  between  the  majority  in  the  Upper  House 
and  the  Government.  On  July  20,  191 1,  the  Bill  passed  third  read- 
ing, accompanied  by  several  important  amendments,  which,  had 
they  been  finally  agreed  to,  would  have  defeated  the  purpose  of 
the  measure. 

It  was  under  these  circumstances  that  the  Prime  Minister  ad- 
dressed the  following  letter  to  the  leader  of  the  Opposition : 

10,  Downing  Street,  July  20 
Dear  Mr.  Balfour, 

I  think  it  is  courteous  and  right,  before  any  public  decisions  are  an- 
nounced, to  let  you  know  how  we  regard  the  political  situation. 

When  the  Parliament  Bill  in  the  form  which  it  has  now  assumed  returns 
to  the  House  of  Commons  we  shall  be  compelled  to  ask  that  House  to 
disagree  with  the  Lords'  amendments. 

In  the  circumstances,  should  the  necessity  arise,  the  Government  will 
advise  the  King  to  exercise  his  prerogative  to  secure  the  passing  into  law 
of  the  Bill  in  substantially  the  same  form  in  which  it  left  the  House  of 
Commons,  and  His  Majesty  has  been  pleased  to  signify  that  he  will  con- 
sider it  his  duty  to  accept  and  act  on  that  advice. 

Yours  sincerely, 

H.  H.  Asquith 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Unionist  Peers  on  July  21,  Lord  Lans- 
downe  read  a  copy  of  the  foregoing  letter  and  pointed  out  that 
the  Parliament  Bill  was  to  be  passed,  either  with  or  without  the 
creation  of  Peers.  If  the  creation  took  place,  the  passage  of  the 
Parliament  Bill  and  such  measures  as  the  Home  Rule  Bill  would - 
not  be  prevented,  while  the  King's  prerogative  would  have  been 
brought  into  the  political  arena  and  a  step  taken  which  must  be 
deplored.    He  therefore  held  that  the  Opposition  Peers  were  no 


436  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

longer  "  free  agents."  The  Earl  of  Halsbury  strongly  opposed 
surrender,  and  was  supported,  according  to  various  accounts,  by 
the  Earl  of  Selborne,  the  Duke  of  Bedford,  the  Marquess  of  Salis- 
buiy,  and  Lord  Willoughby  de  Broke ;  but  Viscount  St.  Aldwyn, 
Lord  Curzon  of  Kedleston,  and  the  Duke  of  Devonshire  strongly 
supported  Lord  Lansdowne  in  advocating  submission.  It  was  said 
by  the  Times  that  the  minority  against  surrender  numbered  about 
fifty.  The  Irish  Unionist  members,  according  to  a  statement  by 
their  chairman,  Sir  Edward  Carson,  informed  Lord  Lansdowne 
that  "  the  disgrace  and  ignominy  of  surrender  on  the  question  far 
outweighed  any  temporary  advantage  "  derived  from  the  fact  that 
Home  Rule  would  be  subject  to  the  delay  of  two  years  imposed 
by  the  Parliament  Bill ;  and  a  dinner  to  the  Earl  of  Halsbury  as 
the  leading  advocate  of  resistance  was  given  on  July  26.  Against 
"  surrender"  the  chief  arguments  were  that  the  country  would  be 
roused  against  the  Liberals  by  the  creation  of  new  Peers,  and  that 
the  latter  would  soon  cease  to  be  Radical. 

The  House  of  Commons  met  to  deal  with  the  Lords'  amend- 
ments on  Monday,  July  24,  19 11.  It  was  thronged  in  every  part, 
and  the  situation  favoured  an  explosion.  Mr.  Asquith,  on  enter- 
ing, was  received  with  Liberal  and  Nationalist  acclamations,  and 
murmurs  and  cries  of  "  Traitor  "  from  the  Opposition,  who  loudly 
cheered  Mr.  Balfour.  After  questions  and  the  introduction  of  five 
new  members,  Mr.  Asquith  rose,  but  was  again  received  with 
uproar  and  cries  of  "  Traitor."  The  Speaker  intervened  without 
avail ;  several  members  on  both  sides  rose  to  points  of  order.  Lord 
\\Hugh  Cecil  taking  a  prominent  part  in  the  disturbance.  There 
were  shouts  to  the  Prime  Minister  of  "  Consult  your  masters !  " 
and  "  Let  Redmond  speak  !  "  Sir  Edward  Carson,  after  further 
interruptions,  moved  the  adjournment  of  the  debate,  but  the 
Speaker  pointed  out  that  as  yet  there  was  no  debate,  and  urged  a 
little  later  that  the  right  of  free  discussion  was  far  more  important 
for  the  Opposition  than  for  the  Government.  Mr.  Asquith  was  then 
able  to  begin  his  speech  and  sketch  the  history  of  the  Parliament 


CURBING  THE  LORDS  437 

Bill.  There  were,  however,  constant  derisive  interruptions,  among 
the  cries  being  "  Leave  the  King  out !  "  and  "  Who  killed  the 
King  ? "  At  last  he  declined  "  to  degrade  himself  further "  by 
pressing  his  arguments  on  the  Opposition ;  he  merely  stated  that 
unless  the  House  of  Lords  would  consent  to  restore  the  Bill  with 
reasonable  amendments  Ministers  would  be  compelled  to  invoke 
the  exercise  of  the  Royal  prerogative.  One  thing  was  certain  — 
the  determination  of  the  Government  and  the  vast  majority  of  the 
people  that  without  further  delay  the  Bill  should  become  law. 

The  motion  for  disagreeing  with  the  Lords'  amendments  was 
at  length  carried  in  the  House  of  Commons  on  August  8,  191 1, 
by  321  votes  to  215. 

The  momentous  debate  on  the  question  of  acquiescence  by  the 
House  of  Lords  in  the  treatment  given  to  their  amendments  by 
the  Commons  took  place  on  August  9  and  10,  191 1.  Lord  Wil- 
loughby  de  Broke,  a  leader  among  the  resisters,  declared  in  the 
course  of  a  vigorous  speech  that  the  Government  might  win  a 
dozen  general  elections  without  altering  his  opposition  to  the  Bill ; 
he  warned  the  bishops  that  the  Established  Church  could  be  re- 
tained only  through  the  agency  of  the  Tory  party.  The  Earl  of 
Halsbury,  the  Dukes  of  Norfolk,  Bedford,  and  Marlborough,  and 
others,  supported  resistance.  Lord  Newton,  in  an  answering  speech, 
described  the  attitude  of  the  resisters  as  that  of  the  Chinese  who 
killed  themselves  on  the  doorstep  of  the  person  who  had  ill-treated 
them,  and  said  that,  so  far  from  ridicule  killing  the  creation,  "  they 
would  have  the  ridicule,  and  the  Government,  the  Peers."  The 
Marquess  of  Lansdowne  likewise  urged  surrender,  as  did  Lord 
Ribblesdale,  Viscount  St.  Aldwyn,  the  Earl  of  Camperdovvn,  and 
others. 

At  last,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  said  briefly  that  he  had 
intended  to  abstain  from  voting,  but  he  had  been  influenced  by  the 
callousness  and  levity  with  which  some  noble  Lords  contemplated 
the  creation  of  500  Peers,  which  would  make  the  House  and  the 
country  a  laughing-stock  in  the  Dominions  and  in  foreign  countries. 


438  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Lord  Curzon  of  Kedleston  most  earnestly  advocated  submission, 
because  the  Bill  would  pass  in  any  case;  it  might  be  rejected — ■ 
owing  to  the  actions  of  a  small  minority  of  the  Unionists  —  and 
then  there  would  certainly  be  a  creation  of  Peers  large  enough  to 
upset  the  Constitution.  "  You  will  have  to  start  fresh.  God  knows 
how  we  shall  do  it."  The  Marquess  of  Bristol  interjected,  "It  is 
because  400  Peers  are  going  to  run  away  to-night."  Lord  Curzon 
replied,  "  I  would  sooner  run  away  with  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
than  stand  with  the  noble  Lord."  The  Earl  of  Halsbury  vigorously 
contested  Earl  Curzon's  argument ;  the  Earl  of  Rosebery,  in  ex- 
tremity, announced  his  intention  of  supporting  the  Government ; 
and  the  Earl  of  Selborne,  in  an  impassioned  speech,  asked.  Should 
they  perish  in  the  dark  by  their  own  hand,  or  in  the  light,  killed  by 
their  enemies  ? 

In  intense  excitement,  the  division  took  place,  and  the  result  was 
for  some  time  uncertain.  But  the  motion  "  that  the  House  do  not 
insist  on  the  amendment"  was  carried  by  131  to  114,  thirty-seven 
Unionist  Peers  voting  with  the  Government. 

The  Parliament  Act  of  191 1,  in  its  final  form,  is  given  as 
Extract  ^j.] 

Extract  // 

PROPOSALS   FOR   RESTRICTING   THE   POWER   OF  THE 
HOUSE  OF   LORDS 

{Sir  Henry  Cainpbell-Bannerinan,  Prime  Minister  and  First  Lord 
of  the  T?'easury,  Commons,  June  24,  iQoy) 

Sir  H.  Campbell- Bannerman  ^ :  I  rise  to  move,  "  That,  in 
order  to  give  effect  to  the  will  of  the  people  as  expressed  by  their 
elected  representatives,  it  is  necessary  that  the  power  of  the  other 
House  to  alter  or  reject  Bills  passed  by  this  House  should  be  so 
restricted  by  law  as  to  secure  that  within  the  limits  of  a  single 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  176,  col.  909  sqq. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  439 

Parliament  the  final  decision  of  the  Commons  shall  prevail."  In 
moving  this  Resolution  we  are  following  the  notable  precedent  of 
the  famous  Resolutions  of  1678  and  i860  ;  and  I  hope  our  method 
of  procedure  will  commend  itself  to  the  House.   ... 

My  Motion  affirms  the  predominance  of  the  House  of  Commons 
as  the  representative  House  of  Parliament,  and  I  submit  that  in 
spirit  and  in  fact  that  is  a  strictly  true  constitutional  proposition.  I 
may  claim  for  it,  up  to  a  point,  the  adhesion  of  the  Party  opposite 
and  of  the  House  of  Lords  itself.  The  supremacy  of  the  people 
is  admitted  in  theory  even  by  the  House  of  Lords.  It  is  admitted 
that  the  will  of  the  people  —  that  will  upon  which  the  poet  tells 
us  our  Constitution  is  broad-based  —  is  in  the  long  run  entitled  to 
prevail.  It  is  admitted  even  by  those  whose  natural  leanings  and 
proclivities  would  lead  them  to  a  very  restricted  order  of  repre- 
sentative institutions.  To  that  extent,  therefore,  we  are  seemingly 
at  one.  How,  then,  is  that  will  of  the  people  to  be  got  at  and 
ascertained  unless  you  take  the  view  of  the  elective  House  as  ex- 
pressing it  ?  The  supremacy  of  the  people  in  legislation  implies,  in 
this  country  at  any  rate,  the  authority  of  the  Commons.  The  party 
for  which  I  speak  has  never  swerved  from  that  position,  and  unless 
you  are  going  to  fall  back  upon  some  foreign  method,  such  as  the 
referendum  or  the  mandate  or  the  plebiscite,  or  some  other  way  of 
getting  behind  the  backs  of  the  elected  to  the  electors  themselves, 
such  as  was  advised  by  both  the  first  and  third  Napoleon  —  unless 
that  is  the  example  you  are  going  to  follow,  then  there  is  no  course 
open  but  to  recognise  ungrudgingly  the  authority  which  resides  in 
this  House  and  to  accept  the  views  of  the  Nation  as  represented 
in  its  great  interests  within  these  walls.  The  Resolution  embodies, 
therefore,  a  principle  the  logic  of  which  at  any  rate  is  accepted  by 
both  Parties  and  both  Houses  —  the  principle  of  the  predominance 
of  the  House  of  Commons. 

But  let  us  be  quite  clear  as  to  what  we  mean  by  predominance, 
and  especially  what  we  mean  by  the  ultimate  prevalence  of  the 
House  of  Commons.    We  do  not  on  this  side  of  the  House  mean 


440  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

an  abstract,  a  deferred  supremacy ;  that  is  not  what  we  mean  by 
the  supremacy  of  the  House  of  Commons.  We  do  not  mean  a 
supremacy  that  comes  into  play  after  one  or  two  or  more  appeals 
to  the  country,  before  which  a  determined  resistance  of  the  other 
House  will  give  way.  That  is  not  what  we  mean  by  the  supremacy 
of  the  House  of  Commons.  That  arrangement  does  not  in  the 
least  fulfil  the  requirements  of  the  Constitution.  Where  we  differ, 
therefore,  is  as  to  the  point  at  which  the  authority  of  this  House 
becomes  effective.   .  .  . 

What  meaning  does  the  supremacy  of  the  House  of  Commons 
convey  to  the  minds  of  the  House  of  Lords  ?  In  the  first  place,  it  is 
matter  of  common  knovv'ledge  that  its  working  varies  according  to 
circumstances.  When  their  own  Party  are  in  power  —  that  is  the 
Party  to  which  the  vast  majority  of  the  Members  of  the  House  of 
Lords  belong  —  they  recognise  without  reservation,  they  even  make 
what  I  would  almost  call  indecent  haste,  to  recognise  this  supremacy. 
There  is  never  a  suggestion  that  the  checks  and  balances  of  the 
Constitution  are  to  be  brought  into  play  ;  there  is  never  a  hint  that 
this  House  is  anything  but  a  clear  and  faithful  mirror  of  the  settled 
opinions  and  desires  of  the  country,  or  that  the  arm  of  the  execu- 
tive falls  short  of  being  the  instrument  of  the  national  will.  No, 
Sir  ;  the  other  House,  in  these  circumstances,  may  be  said  to  adopt 
and  act  upon  the  view  of  the  inherent  authority  of  this  House,  which 
was  expressed  by  Edmund  Burke  in  these  words,  "The  virtue,  spirit, 
and  essence  of  the  House  of  Commons  consists  in  its  being  the 
express  image  of  the  nation."  I  know  of  no  instance  under  a  con- 
genial regime,  that  is  to  say,  not  in  recent  times,  when  the  House 
of  Lords  seriously  challenged  the  decisions  of  this  House  except 

—  it  is  rather  comical  —  in  the  solitary  case  of  the  Deceased  Wife's 
Sister  Bill ;  on  two  separate  occasions  this  House  has  passed  this 
Bill  when  the  Conservatives  were  in  power  —  a  private  Bill  it  was 

—  and  on  both  occasions  the  other  House  rejected  it.  It  is  almost 
refreshing  to  come  upon  this  marked  action  in  the  revising  House. 
But  certainly  the  supposed  characteristic  of  a  single-chamber  system 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  44 1 

of  Government  which  prevails  in  Unionist  times  has  never  been 
broken  by  any  hint  or  suggestion  that  the  Government  and  the 
House  of  Commons  should  go  to  the  countr}^  and  ascertain  what 
the  people  were  thinking.    That  is  a  novel  innovation.   .  .   . 

.  .  .  Witness  the  transition  that  takes  place  the  moment  a  Lib- 
eral House  of  Commons  comes  into  being.  A  complete  change 
comes  over  this  constitutional  doctrine  of  the  supremacy  of  this 
Chamber.  They  rested  and  reposed  on  its  supremacy  during  the 
period  that  I  have  been  dealing  with.  Now  they  challenge  it ;  and 
it  becomes  a  deferred  supremacy — a  supremacy  which  is  to  arrive, 
it  may  be,  at  the  next  election,  or  the  election  after  that,  or  may  be 
never  at  all.  Suppose  a  difference  to  arise  between  the  two  Houses, 
not  the  existing  House  of  Commons  but  some  future  one  is  to  pre- 
vail. What  is  the  good  of  electing  us  to  the  House  of  Commons  ? 
[Ironical  Opposition  cheers.]  What  is  the  good  of  electing  Mem- 
bers of  either  side  to  the  House  of  Commons,  if  the  opinion  of 
the  House  of  Commons  is  to  be  of  no  account  ?  If  the  House  of 
Lords  knows  better  than  the  House  of  Commons,  what  is  the  good 
of  the  House  of  Commons  ?  I  do  not  know,  I  never  have  known, 
and  I  have  never  been  able  to  discover,  by  what  process  the 
House  of  Lords  professes  to  ascertain  whether  or  not  our  deci- 
sions correspond  with  the  sentiments  of  the  electors ;  but  what  I 
do  know  is  that  this  House  has  to  submit  to  carr}'  on  its  existence 
in  a  state  of  suspense,  knowing  that  our  measures  are  liable  to 
be  amended,  altered,  rejected,  and  delayed  in  accordance  with  the 
mysterious  intuition,  almost  divination,  which  enables  the  Lords  to 
keep  in  immediate  touch  with  the  electors  during  a  Liberal  adminis- 
tration. It  is  a  singular  thing,  when  you  come  to  reflect  upon  it, 
that  the  representative  system  should  only  hold  good  when  one 
Party  is  in  office,  and  should  break  down  to  such  an  extent  as  that 
the  non-elective  House  must  be  called  in  to  express  the  mind  of 
the  country  whenever  the  country  lapses  into  Liberalism.   .   .   . 

Now  I  come  to  another  question  which  we  have  to  ask  our- 
selves, and  that  is :   What  is  the  nature  of  the  authority  under 


442  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

which  the  other  House,  during  its  intermittent  period  of  activity 
claims  to  override  and  suspend  the  decisions  of  this  House  and  to 
afford  it  a  merely  nominal  and  deferred  predominance  ?  What  are 
the  grounds  on  which  the  Lords  intervene  ?  There  is  no  occasion 
to  go  back  very  far.  Before  the  Reform  Act  there  was  really  no 
question  of  this  kind  before  the  country,  for  this  reason :  Both 
Houses  were  in  the  habit  of  working  together  in  the  interests  of 
the  existing  state  of  society,  which  was  very  far  from  being  a  dem- 
ocratic state,  and  any  tendency  to  independence  on  the  part  of  the 
House  of  Commons  was  held  in  check  by  the  fact  that  there  were 
some  300  votes  in  this  House  under  control  of  the  Members  of 
the  other  House.  There  was,  therefore,  in  these  circumstances, 
no  particular  occasion  for  a  veto.  Nor  do  I  propose  to  go  over 
subsequent  history  —  a  dismal  history  in  this  respect,  in  which 
beneficent  measures  were  flouted  or  rejected  or  mutilated  and  vio- 
lent hands  laid  upon  them  by  the  other  House.  Their  actions  are 
all  of  a  piece,  and  I  think  we  may  be  quite  content  to  take  the 
most  recent  instances  as  a  pattern  and  example  of  what  has  been 
happening  ever  since  the  Reform  Bill  was  passed.  We  take  them 
because  we  have  them  fresh  in  our  minds.  They  happened  under 
our  eyes  in  the  present  Parliament,  which  has  not  had  a  long  life 
yet.  These  events,  marking  as  they  do,  in  my  opinion,  the  climax  of 
this  long  series  of  rebuffs  put  upon  this  House,  and  through  this 
House  upon  the  electors,  embody  in  themselves  in  a  sufficiently 
striking  manner  the  claims  that  are  really  put  forward  to  stultify 
the  action  of  the  Commons.  When  you  find  a  general  election  like 
the  last  treated  as  mere  irrelevance,  and  a  House  of  Commons 
which  returned  with  an  unexampled  majority  regarded  elsewhere 
as  a  body  devoid  of  real  vitality  and  vital  authority,  I  say  we  then 
have  to  look  upon  its  claims  with  a  stronger  feeling,  because  they 
are  put  forward  with  a  degree  of  violent  aggressiveness  which 
compels  us  to  challenge  them.  If  we  are  concerned  at  all  with  the 
authority  of  the  House  of  Commons  — -  and  I  trust  that  everyone 
within  these  walls  is  concerned  —  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  let  this 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  443 

pass.  I  therefore  take  the  actual  cases  within  our  own  immedi- 
ate experience  as  the  touchstone  of  the  claims  of  the  other  House. 
The  first  thing  I  would  point  out  is  that  the  merits  and  demerits 
of  the  Bills  that  we  deal  with  are  not  in  question  at  all.  The  Edu- 
cation Bill  and  the  Plural  Voting  Bill  may  be  thoroughly  bad  Bills 
in  the  estimation  of  hon.  Members  opposite  and  of  the  right  hon. 
Gentleman  at  the  winding  of  whose  horn  the  portcullis  over  the 
way  comes  rattling  down.  If  the  country  shares  the  view  of  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman,  it  is  not  there  [The  Front  Opposition  Bench] 
he  would  be,  but  here.  But  let  hon.  Gentlemen  observe  that  the 
other  House,  when  it  proceeded,  within  twelve  months  of  the 
election,  summarily  to  dispose  of  these  measures  of  ours,  did  so, 
according  to  its  own  account,  not  on  their  merits,  but  because  it 
claimed  to  know  the  mind  of  the  country.  That  was  the  plea  that 
was  urged.  "  Your  Education  Bill,"  they  said,  "  does  not  square 
with  the  professions  of  the  people  or  the  desires  of  the  people, 
and  as  for  your  Electoral  Reform  Bill,  it  ought  to  be  part  of  a 
larger  scheme  of  reform  such  as  the  country  desires."  Of  course, 
they  dwelt  on  the  vicious  qualities  of  our  poor  Bills.  So  they  did 
in  the  case  of  the  Trade  Disputes  Bill,  which  was  an  even  blacker 
and  more  iniquitous  Bill  than  the  others.  But  they  passed  this  Bill, 
and  they  rejected  the  less  infamous  Bills ;  and  they  were  strictly 
logical  in  so  doing.  By  that  I  mean  that  the  reason  they  gave 
was  an  intelligible  reason.  They  professed  to  be  satisfied  that  a 
powerful  section  of  opinion  demanded  the  one  Bill  and  they  pro- 
fessed to  be  unsatisfied  that  the  others  were  so  demanded.  They 
acted  on  their  own  judgment.  Their  whole  case  rests  upon  that. 
And  I  may  add  as  a  subsidiary  reason  that  in  the  case  of  the  in- 
famous and  iniquitous  Bill  it  was  considered  desirable  to  exercise 
some  circumspection.  We  all  remember  the  words  of  Lord  Lans- 
downe  that  they  were  passing  through  a  period  when  it  was  neces- 
sary for  the  House  of  Lords  to  move  with  great  caution.  Conflicts 
and  controversies  might  be  inevitable.  Let  their  Lordships,  as  far 
as  they  were  able,  be  sure  that  if  they  were  to  join  issue  they  did 


444  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

so  on  ground  which  was  as  favourable  as  possible  to  themselves  — 
not  to  the  country  —  in  the  interests  of  good  and  sound  legislation. 
In  this  case  he  believed  the  ground  would  be  unfavourable  to  the 
House.  So  they  passed  that  most  iniquitous  and  dangerous  and 
disastrous  Bill.  They  made  friends  with  the  mammon  of  unright- 
eousness with  a  view  to  maintaining  themselves  in  their  own  hab- 
itation. Therefore,  in  addition  to  this  intermittent  action  we  have 
to  take  note  of  this  further  singular  fact  that  the  powers  of  that 
House  are  avowedly  exercised  without  reference  to  the  merits  of 
what  is  sent  up  to  it,  and  on  the  ground  that  we,  who  are  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  people  as  the  result  of  all  our  elaborate  electoral 
machinery,  are  incapable  of  speaking  and  acting  on  their  behalf. 

Such  a  claim  will  not  stand  a  moment's  investigation.  The  Con- 
stitution knows  nothing  of  this  doctrine  of  the  special  mandate, 
nothing  whatever.  It  is  an  invention  apparently  of  the  Lords,  de- 
signed to  afford  them  some  kind  of  shelter  behind  which  they  may 
get  rid  of  the  Bills  they  dislike.  Now,  I  am  anxious  to  make  this 
matter  clear,  because  it  is  important  to  my  proposition  —  namely, 
that  the  relations  of  the  Houses  call  for  definition ;  and  if  the 
action  of  the  House  of  Lords  is  based  on  assumptions  which  are 
fatal  to  a  true  representative  system,  then  the  question  of  how 
far  they  are  entitled  to  push  such  action  surely  requires  serious 
consideration.  If  this  House  was  elected  on  a  mandate  for  this 
or  a  mandate  for  that,  or  a  mandate  for  the  other,  I  could  under- 
stand, even  if  I  did  not  approve  of,  the  process  of  sifting  and  try- 
ing our  decisions  in  order  to  see  whether  they  corresponded  with 
what  passed  at  the  elections.  In  its  absence  such  a  claim  becomes 
grotesque.  Yet  how  seriously  is  it  urged.  We  are  invited  to  go  to 
the  country  ad  hoc  to  test  whether  the  other  House  or  this  House 
is  right  whenever  we  come  to  a  deadlock.  We  have  not  been 
elected  on  any  such  system  as  that.  We  were  elected  to  carry 
out  certain  broad  principles,  and  yet,  forsooth,  w^e  are  to  go  back, 
and  be  re-elected  on  Bills  and  on  sections  of  Bills  and  subsections 
of  Bills  if  we  are  to  convince  the  other  House.    I  shall  have  a 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  445 

word  to  say  directly  on  this  demand  for  a  dissolution,  but  I  want 
first  to  say  how  glad  I  am  to  be  able  to  claim  the  right  hon.  Gen- 
tleman opposite  as  a  sworn  foe  of  the  doctrine  of  the  mandate. 
He  has  described  it  as  fundamentally  essentially  a  vicious  theory. 
"  You  could  not  work  Parliamentary  institutions,"  he  says,  ''  on 
that  principle  at  all."  [Opposition  cheers.]  Yes,  but  it  is  on  that 
very  principle  that  the  House  of  Lords  are  working.  Why  has  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman  not  warned  the  House  of  Lords  that  they 
are  pursuing  a  course  under  which,  as  he  says,  Parliamentary 
institutions  cannot  be  worked  at  all,  and  that  they  are  seeking 
to  inveigle  us  into  an  unconstitutional  and  vicious  system  ?  It  is 
strange  that  when  they  challenge  us  because  we  have  not  got  a 
mandate  for  this,  or  that  we  have  misread  a  mandate  for  that,  or 
that  we  must  go  to  the  country  for  a  mandate  for  the  other  thing, 
the  right  hon.  Gentleman  sits  quietly  and  allows  them  to  flounder 
in  the  morass.   .   .   . 

Now  I  come  to  the  outline  of  the  plan  which  the  Government 
propose.  It  is  proposed  that,  if  a  Bill  is  sent  up  to  the  other 
House,  and  in  the  result  the  two  Houses  find  agreement  impos- 
sible, a  Conference  shall  be  held  between  Members  appointed  in 
equal  numbers  by  the  two  Houses.  The  conference  will  be  of 
small  dimensions.  Its  proceedings  will  be  private,  and  its  objects 
will  be  to  enable  each  Party  to  negotiate  and  to  seek  for  a  com- 
mon measure  of  agreement  which  the  Government  might  find 
itself  able  to  adopt.  There  is  nothing  novel  in  this  proposal,  be- 
cause the  two  Houses  formerly  did  meet  in  conference ;  but  there 
were  certain  inconveniences  in  the  procedure,  and,  whether  it  was 
due  to  the  fact  that  the  Commons  were  expected  to  go  into  the 
other  House  bareheaded  and  to  remain  standing,  or  whether  it  was 
due  to  the  obvious  practical  difficulties  of  arriving  at  any  decision 
at  a  joint  meeting  carried  on  by  a  large  number  of  persons  in  this 
singular  manner,  no  Conference  has  been  held  since  1836.  Infor- 
mal conferences  between  members  of  the  Government  and  Oppo- 
sition in  the  two  Houses  have,  of  course,  not  infrequently  been 


446  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

held  since  that  date,  and  sometimes  good  results  have  followed. 
But  what  the  Government  proposes  is  that  statutory  provision 
should  be  made  for  such  meetings  in  the  event  of  disagreement, 
and  that  the  Conference  should  occupy  a  definite  place  in  the 
transactions  between  the  two  Houses.  Supposing,  then,  the  Con- 
ference to  be  unproductive.  The  Bill  —  either  the  same  Bill,  with 
or  without  modifications,  or  a  similar  Bill  with  the  same  object  — 
might  at  the  discretion  of  the  Government  be  reintroduced  after 
a  substantial  interval ;  and  by  a  substantial  interval  I  have  in  my 
mind  a  minimum  of  perhaps  six  months,  unless  in  cases  of  great 
urgency.  This  Bill  would  be  passed  through  its  various  stages  in 
the  House  of  Commons  under  limitations  of  time  —  limitations 
of  time  adapted  to  the  requirements  of  the  case  —  discussion  be- 
ing restricted,  so  far  as  possible,  to  the  new  matter,  if  any,  intro- 
duced. The  Bill  would  then  be  sent  up  again,  so  that  the  other 
House  would  have  a  second  and  ample  opportunity  of  considering 
it.  If  there  was  still  a  difference  between  the  two  Houses,  a 
Conference  might  again  be  summoned.  Supposing  this  time  an 
arrangement  again  failed,  this  second  Bill  would. be  reintroduced 
and  passed  swiftly  through  all  its  stages  in  this  House  in  the 
form  last  agreed  to  and  sent  to  the  other  House  with  an  inti- 
mation that  unless  passed  in  that  form  it  would  be  passed  over 
their  heads.  Yet  again  there  would  be  a  Conference,  and  a 
further  effort  to  agree.  Now  the  House  will  see  that  the  plan 
which  I  have  sketched  gives  ample  —  some  will  think  too  ample 
—  opportunities  for  discussion  and  reflection,  and  that  it  pro- 
vides full  room  in  the  intervals  for  consideration  by  the  countr)'. 
And  we  are  convinced  that  it  leaves  no  opening  for  hasty  or 
arbitrary  action.   .  .  . 

Here  is  a  most  important  point.  It  may  be  said  that  it  will  be 
in  the  power  of  an  effete  Government  in  the  last  years  of  an  effete 
Parliament,  when  the  sentiment  of  the  country  may  have  become 
cold,  or,  at  least,  uncertain,  to  cany  things  with  a  high  hand,  and 
in  such  circumstances  any  amount  of  deliberation  and  consultation 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  447 

would  fail  to  prevent  rash  and  arbitrary  measures  being  taken. 
It  is  quite  true,  Sir,  that  we  have  known  cases  where  an  effete  Gov- 
ernment, trading  on  the  initial  strength  it  had  lost,  has  dragged 
out  an  undesirable  existence  amid  the  flickering  activity  which  we 
associate  with  the  exhausted  candle.  But  no  one  can  say  that 
that  is  a  favourable  moment  for  legislation.  Therefore,  I  have  to 
state  that  we  are  strongly  of  opinion  that  the  way  to  guard  against 
such  an  evil  is  the  very  simple  way  of  shortening  the  duration  of 
Parliament. 

This  reform  can  be  justified  on  other  and  broader  grounds. 
But  I  am  here  speaking  of  it  only  in  face  of  this  particular  matter 
with  which  my  Resolution  deals ;  and  we  consider  that  the  un- 
doubted danger  that  the  House  of  Commons,  with  the  increased 
power  which  we  claim  for  it,  might  for  some  years  of  its  life  have 
its  genuine  representative  character  impaired,  can  be  best  guarded 
against  by  a  more  frequent  reference  to  the  electorate.  This  is,  as 
is  known,  no  new  proposal.  Most  of  us  on  this  Bench  have  voted 
for  quinquennial  Parliaments,  and  we  believe  that  the  reduction  of 
the  period  of  Parliamentary  existence  to  five  years  will  add  vigour, 
freshness,  and  life  to  our  Parliamentary  system. 

There  are,  indeed,  very  vague,  and,  I  think,  not  very  well- 
informed  proposals  for  a  foreign  institution,  called  a  referendum, 
whereby  a  particular  Bill  can  be  submitted  to  a  special  vote  on  the 
part  of  the  electors  of  the  country.  I  see  the  strongest  objections 
to  any  such  proposal.  The  necessary  isolation  of  the  subject  from 
the  whole  range  of  political  feeling  is  well-nigh  impossible ;  it  is  in- 
consistent with,  and,  in  my  opinion,  destructive  of,  Parliamentary 
government  as  we  understand  it ;  and  it  has  the  peculiarity  that 
you  would  be  introducing  a  new  element  into  our  Constitution 
which  would  never  come  into  play  while  one  order  of  things  was 
represented  in  the  Government,  but  when  Liberals  were  in  a  ma- 
jority would  be  employed  for  the  purpose  of  flouting  and  defeating 
the  Government  of  the  day,  the  majority  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, and  the  electorate  itself. 


448  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Let  me  point  out  that  the  plan  which  I  have  sketched  to  the 
House  does  not  in  the  least  preclude  or  prejudice  any  proposals 
which  may  be  made  for  the  reform  of  the  House  of  Lords  itself. 
The  constitution  and  composition  of  the  House  of  Lords  is  a  ques- 
tion entirely  independent  of  my  subject.  My  Resolution  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  relations  of  the  two  Houses  to  the  Crown,  but  only 
with  the  relations  of  the  two  Houses  one  to  the  other.  At  present 
we  are  face  to  face,  as  I  have  shown,  with  the  ultimate  supremacy 
of  the  House  of  Lords.  I  see  that  this  is  the  theory  almost  nakedly 
put  forward  by  some  of  those  gentlemen  in  the  Press  who  are  good 
enough  to  tell  us  what  we  ought  to  do.  They  evidently  have  in 
their  minds  as  a  model  some  of  those  Continental  States  whose 
system  is  essentially  and  fundamentally  autocratic,  but  in  which  the 
autocracy  ornaments  and  supplements  itself  with  a  representative 
body,  useful  for  occupying  public  attention  and  for  hammering  out 
the  details  of  legislation,  but  bearing  much  the  same  relation  that 
the  kitchenmaid  bears  to  the  cook.  The  House  of  Lords,  according 
to  this  theory,  is  to  be  the  cook.  Sir,  the  House  of  Commons  is 
spoken  of  by  these  instructors  of  the  public  in  language  of  formal, 
guarded,  traditional  respect,  but  is  treated  as  a  wayward,  impulsive 
body  allowed  to  do  useful  work  and  on  occasion  to  have  its  fling, 
but  to  be  pulled  up  by  the  House  of  Lords  as  soon  as  it  ventures 
upon  the  pet  prejudices  and  interests  of  that  which  used  to  be  the 
ruling  class  in  this  kingdom.  Sir,  we  have  not  so  learned  our  exist- 
ing Constitution.  We  have  perfect  confidence  in  the  good  feeling, 
the  good  sense,  the  wisdom,  the  righteousness,  and  the  patriotism 
of  our  country.  We  need  no  shelter  against  them  ;  and,  therefore, 
we  would  invert  the  roles  thus  assigned  to  the  two  Houses.  Let  the 
country  have  the  fullest  use  on  all  matters  of  the  experience,  wis- 
dom, and  patriotic  industry  of  the  House  of  Lords  in  revising  and 
amending  and  securing  full  consideration  for  legislative  measures ; 
but,  and  these  words  sum  up  our  whole  policy,  the  Commons  shall 
prevail. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  449 

Extract  'j2 

DEFENCE  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  LORDS 

{Mr.  ArtJiurJ.  Balfour,  Coiiuiiojis,  June  24,  igoy) 

Mr.  Balfour  ^ :  The  very  last  words  that  fell  from  the  mouth 
of  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  indicate  sufficiently  the  difference  which 
lies  between  us.  His  contention,  expressed  with  considerable  reit- 
eration in  the  course  of  his  speech,  is  that  any  House  of  Commons, 
elected  at  any  particular  date,  is  competent  within  the  term  of  its 
own  existence  to  deal  with  the  whole  interests  of  the  State  and 
modify  them  completely,  without  further  reference  to  the  people 
who  gave  it  birth.  He  lays  it  down  categorically  in  the  last  sentence 
he  uttered  that  it  is  the  House  of  Commons  alone  whose  rights  and 
privileges  we  have  to  consider.  I  venture  to  consider  that  we  might 
occasionally  think  of  the  people.  The  real  and  only  problem  which 
ought  to  be  before  the  minds  of  those  who  are  engaged  in  dealing 
with  the  Constitution  of  a  free  country  is  how  the  continuous  will 
of  the  people  —  the  interests  of  the  existing  generation  and  the  in- 
terests of  generations  to  come  —  can  be  best  considered.  And  it  is 
to  that  problem  alone  that  I  shall  endeavour  to  direct  the  attention 
of  the  House  to-day  in  the  few  observations  I  have  to  make  upon 
the  right  hon.  Gentleman's  proposals.  .  .  . 

I  do  not  at  all  deny  that  this  House  is  the  predominant  partner. 
By  the  practice  of  the  Constitution  it  undoubtedly  is  so.  But  just 
see  how  great  are  the  powers  that  this  House  possesses  which  the 
other  House  neither  possesses  nor  makes  any  claim  to.  We  must 
always  remember  that  the  most  important  decision  the  country 
makes  at  the  election  is  who  shall  control  the  administrative  machin- 
ery and  the  general  policy  of  the  country.  That  decision  the  House 
of  Lords  neither  claims  to  touch,  nor  can  touch.  The  Government 
of  the  day,  the  House  of  Commons  of  the  day,  would  treat  with 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  176,  col.  926  sqq. 


450  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

derision  any  vote  passed  by  the  House  of  Lords  condemning  a 
particular  Ministry  or  a  particular  member  of  a  Ministry.  They 
would  not  suggest  for  a  moment  that  such  a  vote  carried  with  it 
either  the  resignation  of  the  Government  or  the  Minister,  or  a  dis- 
solution, or  any  consequence  whatever  except  a  mere  statement  of 
opinion  on  the  part  of  their  Lordships  that  they  disapproved  of  a 
Ministry  to  whom  this  House  gave  its  confidence.  That,  after  all,  is 
the  greatest  of  the  powers  which  this  House  possesses.  We  can  put 
an  end  to  a  Government ;  we  can  bring  a  Government  into  being ; 
we  can  destroy  the  career  of  a  Minister ;  and  we  can  pass  a  vote 
of  censure  which  carries  with  it  an  immediate  resignation.  We  have 
our  hand  upon  the  administrative  machine  to  this  extent  at  all  events 
—  that  we  cannot  prevent  a  Government  doing  that  of  which  we 
disapprove  ;  we  can  afterwards  punish  it  for  having  done  so. 

It  is  true  that  the  Administration  is  in  many  particulars  far  out 
of  the  reach  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  ought  to  be.  The 
House  of  Commons  cannot  make  a  treaty ;  it  cannot  prevent  the 
Government  making  a  treaty  ;  if  it  could,  w^ould  the  New  Hebrides 
Convention  ever  have  been  made  ?  It  cannot  prevent  the  Govern- 
ment making  war ;  it  cannot  prevent  the  Government  making  peace 
or  exercising  any  one  of  these  great  administrative  responsibilities. 
All  it  can  do  is  afterwards  to  pass  some  condemnation  upon  the 
Government.  In  passing  that  condemnation  it  takes  into  account 
not  merely  the  particular  executive  transaction,  but  whether  upon 
the  whole  it  desires  to  see  the  Government  retained  in  office  or 
not ;  and  the  House  of  Commons  will  constantly  condone  actions 
of  which  it  disapproves  simply  because  it  does  not  wish  to  dis- 
possess the  Government  of  office.  In  that  sense  the  Government 
always  possesses  the  confidence  of  the  House  of  Commons.  .  .  . 

We  all  being  agreed  that  the  House  of  Lords  under  our  existing 
system  occupies  a  very  subordinate  position,  the  question  is  whether 
that  position,  subordinate  as  it  is  now,  shall  be  made  yet  more  sub- 
ordinate by  the  House  of  Lords  being  deprived  altogether  of  the 
power  of  preventing  a  particular  House  of  Commons,  elected  at 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  45  I 

some  particular  conjuncture,  from  doing  everything  it  wishes,  not 
merely  in  the  sphere  of  administration,  where  you  must  leave  it  to 
the  Government  of  the  day  for  good  or  for  ill,  but  doing  whatever 
it  likes  in  the  sphere  of  legislation,  where  you  may  in  one  day,  or  at 
all  events  in  a  few  weeks,  upset  institutions  which  have  taken  cen- 
turies to  rear  and  which  once  destroyed  can  never  be  replaced.  .  .  . 

I  gather  from  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  that  he  thinks  this  is  a 
very  undemocratic  way  of  looking  at  the  matter.  What  is  a  demo- 
cratic way  of  looking  at  it  ?  I  understand  the  democratic  theory 
of  Government  to  be  that  those  who  are  concerned  with  the  deci- 
sion should  be  the  people  who  iaake  it ;  and  as  far  as  that  can  be 
attained,  I,  at  all  events,  desire  to  see  it  attained.  But  who  is  con- 
cerned with  the  decision  which  we  make  when  a  great  constitutional 
issue  is  involved  ?  Is  it  the  particular  Parliament  ?  Are  the  par- 
ticular male  adults  in  a  given  year  who  have  got  the  given  qualifica- 
tions the  only  people  whose  interests  are  concerned  ?  Those  adult 
males  are,  in  the  first  place,  the  heirs,  and,  in  the  second  place, 
trustees  of  many  centuries ;  and  it  is  preposterous  to  say  that  we 
should  so  frame  our  Constitution  that  the  holders  of  power  for  the 
moment  should  be  regarded  as  in  every  respect  the  irresponsible 
managers,  not  only  of  their  own  affairs  for  the  moment,  but  of  the 
affairs  of  their  country  for  all  time.  Because,  remember,  there  are 
many  things  which  can  be  done  which  are  irreversible  when  you 
are  dealing  with  great  growths  in  the  region  of  politics ;  just  as 
when  you  are  dealing  with  them  in  the  region  of  nature  you  cannot 
replace  that  which  you  destroy.  You  may  pull  down  a  building  and 
erect  another  exactly  like  it ;  you  cannot  cut  down  a  tree  and  say, 
"  To-morrow  I  will  have  another  tree  in  its  place."  So  it  is  with 
an  institution.  You  are  absolutely  bound  to  see  that  no  hasty  de- 
cision shall  upset  in  one  reckless  hour  interests  which  have  been 
slowly  and  painfully  built  up  by  our  predecessors,  and  which  our 
successors  never  can  replace. 

Therefore,  I  say,  you  must  in  this  country  do  what  every  other 
country  has  done,  what  some  other  countries   have  done  with 


452  BRITISH   SOCIAL  TOLITICS 

over-caution  and  over-care,  —  see  that  there  is  some  permanence 
and  continuity  in  your  institutions.  I  am  no  favourer  of  perpetual 
entails,  1  do  not  wish  to  see  the  institutions  of  this  country  in  any 
particular  stereotyped  and  perpetuated  for  all  time,  made  absolutely 
petrified  and  immovable,  as,  for  instance,  the  institutions  of  the 
American  Commonwealth  are,  or  almost  are,  under  the  peculiar 
regulations  of  their  Constitution.  But  while  I  do  not  wish  to  imitate 
the  immovable  conservatism  of  the  republican  institutions  of  Amer- 
ica, I  think  we  should  be  perfectly  insane  —  setting  aside  not  only 
the  lessons  of  our  own  history,  but  of  every  other  history  —  if  we 
did  not  so  arrange  our  Constitution  that  when  the  people  decide 
upon  a  change  it  shall  be  after  the  most  mature  consideration,  after 
the  thing  has  been  weighed  and  looked  at  from  all  sides,  and  after 
it  has  been  considered  in  isolation  from  all  those  perturbing  con- 
siderations which  operate  at  a  moment.  It  is  folly  to  call  that 
anti-democratic ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  democracy  properly  under- 
stood. It  is  government  of  the  people  by  the  people  —  [An  Hon. 
Member  :  For  the  people  ?]  —  and  for  the  people.  Not  by  the 
people  for  the  people  living  under  one  Parliament,  be  it  of  seven 
or  five  years'  duration,  but  by  the  people  for  the  people  for  genera- 
tions. If  the  interests  we  had  to  deal  with  were  the  interests  of  a 
particular  set  of  electors  at  a  particular  time,  let  them  manage  or 
mismanage  their  own  affairs  as  they  please  ;  but  let  us  take  care 
that  as  interests  far  beyond  their  own  immediate  and  personal  in- 
terests are  confided  to  them,  they  should  exercise  the  great  duties 
thrown  on  them  with  full  responsibility  and  full  knowledge  after 
mature  reflection.  Let  us  not  hand  over,  as  the  right  hon.  Gentle- 
man proposes  to  hand  over,  to  a  House  of  Commons  elected,  it  may 
be  in  some  moment  of  passion,  like  1900  —  [Ministerial  cheers]  — 
like  1906,  the  eternal  and  perpetual  interests  of  the  country.  .  .  . 
I  wish  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  had  given  us  more  details  in 
regard  to  the  disasters  which  have  followed  from  the  present  state 
of  things.  He  skipped  lightly  from  the  beginning  of  time  to  the 
first  Reform  Bill,  and  still  more  lightly  from  the  first  Reform  Bill 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  453 

to  last  year ;  but  in  this  agile  procedure  he  never  made  any  refer- 
ence to  the  greatest  attempt  at  constitutional  change  which  has 
been  made  in  our  time.  That,  of  course,  was  Mr.  Gladstone's 
attempt  to  establish  Home  Rule  in  1886  and  1893.  Home  Rule 
may  be  right  or  wrong.  I  am  not  going  to  argue  that  question. 
But  it  would  be  a  very  great  constitutional  change.  It  would  fun- 
damentally alter  the  relations  between  Great  Britain  and  Ireland ; 
and  even  those  who  believe  in  it  most  firmly,  and  who  look  forward 
to  it  with  the  most  sanguine  confidence,  must  admit  that  it  would 
carry  in  its  train  a  whole  series  of  consequences,  which  it  is  quite 
impossible  for  any  prophet,  however  endowed,  adequately  to  foresee. 
Caution,  therefore,  is  eminently  required  in  making  such  a  change 
as  this.  Our  existing  institutions  have  not  prevented  Home  Rule. 
Home  Rule  may  come.  But  they  have  insured  that  Home  Rule 
shall  not,  at  all  events,  be  carried  in  the  way  which  the  right  hon. 
Gentleman  wants  to  carry  everything  in  future.  If  ever  there  was 
a  decision  of  the  country  upon  Home  Rule,  surely  that  decision 
was  taken,  first  in  1886,  and  secondly  in  1895.  The  decision  may 
have  been  wrong,  but  that  decision  in  1895  absolutely  reversed  the 
decision  which  the  House  of  Commons  had  come  to  in  1886  and 
1893  respectively. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  The  Home  Rule  Bill  of  1886  did  not 
pass  the  Commons. 

Mr.  Balfour  :  It  was  adopted  by  the  Government  of  the  day 
dependent  upon  the  House  of  Commons.  That  is  quite  as  good 
for  the  purpose  of  my  argument.  But  if  you  quarrel  with  the  in- 
stance of  1886,  let  us  confine  our  attention  to  1893.  The  election 
which  followed  in  1895  showed  that  the  people,  perhaps  mistakenly, 
—  I  am  not  arguing  that,  —  were  not  in  favour  of  Home  Rule. 
Now,  let  us  examine  how  Home  Rule  would  have  worked  under 
the  right  hon.  Gentleman's  plan.  He  says  he  is  going  to  introduce 
quinquennial  Parliaments,  and  thinks  by  that  means  the  House  of 
Commons  will  never  be  out  of  touch  with  the  people.  But  the 
House  of  Commons  which  was  dissolved  in  1895  only  lasted  for 


454  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

three  years.  It  therefore  fell  far  short  of  the  quinquennial  term, 
upon  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  relies  for  this  perpetual  co- 
ordination between  the  views  of  the  House  of  Commons  and  the 
views  of  the  people.*  And  yet  the  people  stated  as  decisively  as 
they  could  that  the  House  of  Lords  had  properly  exercised  in  the 
greatest  of  all  cases  the  functions  entrusted  to  it  by  the  Consti- 
tution. Had  the  right  hon.  Gentleman's  so-called  reform  been  in 
existence  in  1893,  Home  Rule,  I  presume,  would  now  be  law  — 
perhaps  to  the  benefit  of  the  community,  but  certainly  against  the 
will  of  the  people.  Is  it  possible,  with  that  instance  fresh  in  our 
memories,  to  say  that  this  change,  whatever  its  other  merits  may 
be,  is  intended,  in  the  words  of  the  Resolution,  to  "  give  effect 
to  the  will  of  the  people  ? "  If  those  who  framed  this  Resolution 
had  in  their  minds  recent  history  in  which  they  themselves  were 
personally  engaged,  this  Resolution  is  hypocritical  on  the  face  of 
it.  It  is  intended  not  to  carry  out  the  will  of  the  people,  but  the 
will  of  the  House  of  Commons  of  the  moment.  Am  I  not,  then, 
justified  in  repeating  the  words  with  which  I  began  my  speech,  thaf 
the  right  hon.  Gentleman  when  he  talks  about  the  people  is  think- 
ing rather  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  that  it  is  our  business 
to  think  rather  of  the  people  than  the  House  of  Commons  ? 

But  this  does  not  exhaust  my  criticism  of  the  right  hon.  Gentle- 
man's motives.  He  has  no  claim,  or  even  the  pretence  of  a  claim, 
to  be  carrying  out  the  will  of  the  people  by  this  Resolution.  It  is 
his  own  will  that  he  wants  to  carry  out.  I  think  the  facts  go  fur- 
ther than  that.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  belongs  to  the  school 
of  Radicalism,  which  holds  as  inveterate  superstition  and  prejudice 
that  the  one  object  you  should  always  be  driving  at  is  not  to  bring 
in  good  legislation,  but  to  alter  the  legislative  machinery.  Social 
legislation  appears  in  their  speeches,  but  it  never  appears  anywhere 
else.  .  .  .  They  have  not  desired  to  bring  in  Bills  which  were  so 
good  that  nobody  could  quarrel  with  them,  but  Bills  so  bad  that 
no  Assembly  left  to  free  discussion  could  reconcile  itself  to  passing 
them  unamended.     That  makes  legislation  extremely  easy;   and 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  455 

it  makes  quarrelling  with  the  House  of  Lords  still  more  easy. 
But  easy  as  that  policy  seems,  much  as  it  saves  any  undue  waste 
of  brain  tissue  on  the  part  of  the  Ministers,  I  see  no  signs  that  it 
is  carrying  great  favour  in  the  country.  I  think  the  people  see 
through  this  transparency.  Many  of  them,  I  dare  say,  voted  for 
right  hon.  Gentlemen  opposite  in  the  mistaken  view  that  it  was 
in  the  power  of  this  Government  or,  indeed,  of  any  Government, 
to  carry  certain  schemes,  or  at  all  events  to  attain  to  certain 
objects  which  they  had  much  at  heart.  Right  hon.  Gentlemen 
opposite  gave  them  to  understand  that  they  had  panaceas  for  all 
those  evils  if  they  came  to  office  ;  but  when  they  had  to  turn  those 
panaceas  from  perorations  into  Bills  they  found  it  extremely  diffi- 
cult, if  not  in  some  cases  impossible.  Under  these  circumstances, 
it  was  far  easier  for  the  Government  to  try  to  quarrel  with  the 
House  of  Lords,  to  say  to  the  people,  "  Oh,  if  you  only  knew 
what  wonderful  schemes  we  have  in  our  heads,  what  admirable 
measures  we  have  in  our  pigeon-holes !  But  there  is  the  House 
of  Lords,  which  will  certainly  reject  them  if  we  send  them  up." 
Cireat  is  their  disappointment,  almost  unaffected,  when  the  House 
of  Lords  passes  a  measure  —  not,  indeed,  the  result  of  the  brains 
of  the  Government,  but  the  result  of  the  Labour  representatives 
—  when  the  House  of  Lords,  instead  of  doing  what  they  were 
intended  to  do,  does  the  opposite,  then  the  right  hon.  Gentleman 
cannot  control  himself.  Their  flagitious,  unscrupulous  opportunism 
moves  his  wrath  and  arouses  his  indignation,  and  for  the  simple 
reason  that  the  right  hon.  Gendeman's  Bills,  as  I  have  said,  were 
never  brought  in  to  pass,  but  to  be  rejected.  ["  Oh,  oh."]  And  I 
think  they  were  so  drafted  that  there  was  great  difficulty  in  some 
cases  in  not  rejecting  the  Bills.  I  venture  to  suggest  to  the  House 
that  that  is  not  the  way  to  prepare  a  road  for  a  great  constitutional 
change.  You  ought  not,  if  you  find  yourself  impotent  in  construc- 
tive legislation,  to  turn  round  and  try  to  curry  favour  with  what 
you  call  the  democracy  by  pulling  down  a  portion  of  the  Constitu- 
tion.  .   .   .    Sir,  the  whole  thing  is  insincere  from  beginning  to  end. 


456  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

The  right  hon.  Gentleman  is  treating  the  Constitution  of  which  he 
ought  to  be  the  guardian  as  a  plaything  of  the  moment,  as  a  mere 
political  expedient,  as  a  means  for  electrifying  and  revivifying,  if 
he  can,  the  waning  popularity  of  himself  and  his  colleagues.  It 
will  serve  no  useful  end ;  and  even  that  relatively  contemptible 
object  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  has  in  view  will  not,  in  my 
judgment,  be  fulfilled,  as  time  will  show  when  next  he  goes  to  that 
people  in  whose  name  he  affects  to  speak  in  this  Resolution,  and 
whose  confidence,  if  not  already  lost,  he  is  losing  every  day. 


Extract  yj 

THE  UNDEMOCRATIC  CHARACTER  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF 
LORDS 

(J/r.  D.  SJiackletoii^  Co;>n/io/is,  Ju/ie  24,  1907) 

Mr.  Shackleton  ^ :  .  .  .  We  have  been  told  that  we  are  wast- 
ing our  time  to-day.  Some  of  us  on  these  Benches  have  thought 
that  for  a  long  time.  We  feel  that  so  far  as  the  country  is  con- 
cerned the  sooner  it  does  devote  a  little  time  to  attempting  to 
remove  this  terrible  obstacle  to  all  improvement  in  the  condition 
of  the  people  the  better.  It  may  have  the  effect  of  putting  off 
other  legislation  for  the  time  being,  but  it  may  make  legislation 
quicker  in  the  future.  We  are  not  now  considering  the  question 
of  a  Single  Chamber  as  against  two  Chambers,  but  whether  we 
are  to  go  on  forever  with  an  hereditary  Chamber. 

Even  the  Leader  of  the  Opposition  has  not  attempted  to  defend 
the  hereditary  principle.  I  listened  most  carefully  to  all  his  refer- 
ences to  the  House  of  Lords,  and  he  did  not  utter  one  single 
sentence  in  favour  of  that  principle.  The  question  is  whether  an 
hereditary  and  non-representative  House  shall  be  perpetual  in  this 
country.    That  is  the  situation  we  have  got  to  face.    I  take  no  other 

1  I'arliamentar}'  Debates,- Fourth  Series,  vol.  176,  col.  941  sqq. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  457 

text  for  my  remarks  than  the  words  of  the  Leader  of  the  Opposi- 
tion, who  said  on  November  28,  "  I  do  not  for  one  moment  be- 
lieve that  the  Lords,  in  the  exercise  of  the  high  functions  entrusted 
to  them  by  the  Constitution,  will  waver  in  their  duty.  Their  duty 
is  not  to  thwart  the  will  of  the  nation,  but  to  see  that  its  will  is 
really  and  truly  carried  out."  The  House  of  Lords  has  no  right 
to  decide  what  is  the  will  of  the  people.  Can  it  be  said  that  a  non- 
representative  body,  composed  entirely  of  gentlemen  drawn  from 
one  class,  is  a  proper  body  to  decide  what  is  the  will  of  the  people 
of  this  countr)' .'  What  are  we  here  for  ?  If  we  do  not  represent 
the  will  of  the  people,  it  is  time  we  came  to  some  understanding 
as  to  what  we  do  represent.  But  a  mere  assertion  of  that  kind  is 
not  sufficient.  That  argument  has  gone  forever,  and  a  determined 
House  and  a  determined  people  will  refuse  to  allow  a  non-repre- 
sentative body  drawn  entirely  from  one  class  to  decide  what  is 
the  will  of  the  people. 

In  the  early  days  there  were  struggles  between  this  House  and 
the  other;  I  read  the  other  day  that  in  164S  a  debate  took  place 
as  to  whether  Black  Rod  should  be  the  supreme  person.  Black 
Rod  had  ordered  certain  people  to  be  arrested,  and  in  the  end 
King  Charles  dissolved  Parliament  and  took  away  from  the  House 
of  Commons  the  right  to  have  anybody  put  into  prison.  And  what 
did  the  House  of  Commons  decide  ?  That  "  The  House  of  Peers 
is  useless  and  dangerous,  and  ought  to  be  abolished."  That  is  the 
view  to-day  of  the  hon.  Members  who  are  sitting  beside  me,  and 
they  believe  that  the  Government  would  have  done  better  if  they 
had  proceeded  on  those  lines. 

During  the  last  hundred  years  the  pages  of  our  history  are  full 
of  their  actions  against  the  people.  In  1807  they  started  by  throw- 
ing out  a  Bill  appointing  a  Committee  of  Council  for  Education. 
During  the  last  century  Bills  for  the  benefit  of  the  people  were 
stopped  and  delayed.  Question  after  question,  such  as  Parliamen- 
tary Reform,  land  reform,  the  Roman  Catholic  position,  religious 
equality,  municipal  and  educational  reform,  and  legal,  social,  and 


458  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

industrial  measures  might  be  quoted  in  which  the  House  of  Lords 
prevented  the  will  of  the  people  being  carried  into  effect.  Surely 
it  is  time  that  those  who  represent  the  people  should  challenge  the 
right  of  the  House  of  Lords  to  force  the  people  to  the  verge  of  a 
revolution  before  giving  way.   .   .   . 

Hasty  legislation  has  been  referred  to.  Is  there  ever  any  hasty 
legislation  of  a  progressive  character .-'  There  may  be  some  of  a 
retrograde  character.  What  reform  have  we  to-day  that  has  not 
been  talked  about  for  years  and  generations  before  it  has  been 
embodied  in  an  Act  of  Parliament  ?  There  is  no  chance  in  this 
country  of  hasty  legislation,  for  all  proposed  reforms  are  subjected 
to  long  discussion  in  public  before  we  hear  of  them  in  the  shape 
of  legislative  measures.  Illustrations  could  be  given  of  cases  in 
which  the  other  House  has  delayed  the  changes  in  the  law  which 
the  people  desired.  No  better  illustration  could  be  given  than  that 
which  took  place  between  1833  ^^^  ^^57  ^^  regard  to  Jewish 
emancipation.  Majorities  in  this  House  on  seven  occasions  were 
in  favour  of  that  reform,  but  the  House  of  Lords  refused  to  pass 
it.  In  the  end,  in  1858,  the  other  House  passed  the  Bill  which 
conferred  political  freedom  and  equality  on  that  class  of  our 
countrymen.   .   .   . 

The  hereditary  principle  is  indefensible  from  every  point  of  view 
of  public  policy.  The  fact  that  it  is  not  defended  is  its  best  and 
greatest  condemnation.  If  it  is  good,  why  not  apply  it  to  other 
governing  bodies  and  the  various  forms  of  business .'  Why  should 
Parliament  be  the  only  place  where  the  hereditary  principle  is 
applied  ?  How  often  have  we  heard  business  men  whom  we  have 
known  refer  in  sorrow  to  the  inclinations  of  their  sons  ?  The  big 
businesses  set  up  by  the  fathers  have  been  lost  under  the  manage- 
ment of  the  sons.  Is  that  not- so  in  regard  to  Parliamentary  affairs 
as  well  as  anything  else .''  Surely  the  time  has  come  when  the  right 
to  govern  by  birth  should  be  abolished  in  this  country.  A  caustic 
writer  puts  it  in  this  way,  "  We  allow  babies  to  be  earmarked  in 
their  cradles  as  future  law-makers,  utterly  regardless  as  to  whether 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  459 

they  turn  out  to  be  statesmen,  or  fools,  or  rogues."  That  is  exactly 
the  situation  put  in  blunt  language.  .  .   . 

I  am  old  enough  to.  remember  that  on  a  previous  occasion  I  had 
the  honour,  along  with  my  hon.  friend  the  Member  for  Sowerby 
Bridge,  to  carry  a  banner  in  1884  in  a  campaign  against  the  House 
of  Lords.  We  were  in  earnest  then,  and  we  are  doubly  in  earnest 
now,  and  I  trust  that  whatever  else  may  be  said  the  taunt  of  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman  will  not  hold  true  that  His  Majesty's  present 
advisers  are  simply  using  this  as  a  red  herring.  I  trust  that  they 
mean  serious  business.  The  recollections  of  1884  are  not  very 
pleasant  to  some  of  us.  There  was  a  great  opportunity  then,  and 
the  country  was  ripe  for  legislation  in  regard  to  the  House  of  Lords. 
I  believe  that  in  1893  the  mistake  that  was  made  was  that  there 
was  too  much  made  of  "  mending  "  and  too  little  about  "  ending  " 
the  House  of  Lords.  I  know  the  opinion  of  workingmen  fairly  well, 
and  I  am  confident  that  they  are  not  in  favour  of  any  truckling 
or  mending.  What  they  are  in  favour  of  is  an  ending  process, 
judging  from  the  expressions  of  opinion  given  at  conferences  and 
other  congregations  of  men.  They  are  not  in  favour  of  any  mending 
because  they  believe  that  would  mean  that  the  Lords  would  have 
greater  power  to  interfere  with  measures  sent  to  them  from  this 
House.  If  there  is  to  be  a  revising  Chamber,  let  it  be  on  different 
principles  altogether  from  the  present  House  of  Lords.  I  hope, 
therefore,  we  in  this  House  shall  determine  to  put  our  shoulders 
to  the  wheel  in  this  matter.  .   .   . 

But  in  regard  to  the  propositions  which  have  been  put  before 
the  House  by  the  Prime  Minister,  let  me  say  this  —  I  think  them 
far  too  generous.  It  appears  to  me  that  once  a  measure  is  rejected, 
if  it  goes  a  second  time  that  ought  to  be  sufficient.  Why  take  up 
the  time  of  the  House  in  sending  it  back  to  the  Lords  a  third  time 
when  you  have  the  people  behind  you,  and  when  you  are  certain 
that  your  decisions  are  those  of  the  country  ?  That  is  the  only 
criticism  I  make  at  the  present  time.  I  think  if  the  House  of  Lords 
gets  two  opportunities  of  considering  a  Bill  that  should  be  enough. 


460  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  7^ 

DEFENCE  OF  TWO-CHAMBER  GOVERNMENT 
(Sir  William  Anson,  Oxford  Universiiy,  Commons,  June  24,  rgoy) 

Sir  William  Anson  ^ :  .  .  .  You  are  practically  proposing  to 
make  this  a  Single-Chamber  Constitution.  Are  we  in  accord  with 
the  general  experience  in  accepting  a  Constitution  of  that  kind  ?  I 
will  venture  to  say  that  there  is  no  civilised  government  which  has 
not  secured  itself  in  some  way  or  other  from  rash  or  hasty  legisla- 
tion by  the  popular  Assembly,  either  by  a  written  Constitution,  or 
by  a  referendum,  or  by  a  Second  Chamber — by  one  of  these  three 
methods  which  are  universally  employed  for  protection  against  this 
undoubted  risk.  The  object  of  a  Second  Chamber,  as  stated  by  an 
eminent  Colonial  authority  is,  to  delay  great  changes  until  the  will 
of  the  people  has  been  permanently  and  conclusively  ascertained. 
We  are  not  singular  in  retaining  this  precaution ;  we  are  rather 
singular  in  having  so  little  precaution  against  violent  and  revolu- 
tionary changes. 

May  I  refer  to  other  democracies  and  republics  ?  Turn  to  the 
United  States,  and  note  the  precaution  taken  against  legislation 
which  runs  counter  to  the  will  of  the  people.  The  Federal  Govern- 
ment is  based  on  a  written  constitution  and  on  two  legislative 
Chambers,  whose  powers  of  law-making  are  defined  and  expressly 
limited  by  the  constitution,  and  a  change  in  the  constitution  can 
only  be  effected  by  something  in  the  nature  of  a  referendum.  Not 
only  that,  but  every  State  has  a  written  constitution,  and  although 
the  legislative  powers  of  those  States  are  unlimited,  except  in  so  far 
as  the  federal  constitution  prescribes,  I  may  say  that  the  tendency 
of  the  constitution  is  to  add  to  the  number  of  subjects  which  are 
excluded  from  the  general  legislative  powers  of  the  State,  and  in 
which  the  constitution  requires  that  there  should  be  a  referendum 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  176,  col.  99S  sqq. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  461 

to  the  people  of  the  country.  And  not  only  that,  but  every  State 
has  two  Chambers.  Mr.  Bryce,  one  of  the  chief  authorities  on  this 
subject,  says,  "  The  need  of  two  Chambers  has  become  an  axiom 
of  political  science,  based  on  the  belief  that  the  innate  tendency  of 
an  Assembly  to  become  hasty,  tyrannical,  or  corrupt,  can  only  be 
checked  by  the  co-existence  of  another  House  of  equal  authority." 
He  further  states  that  "  the  only  States  that  have  ever  tried  to 
do  with  one  House  are  Pennsylvania,  Georgia,  and  Vermont,  each 
of  which  gave  up  the  system,  one  after  four  years,  the  other  after 
twelve  years,  and  the  third  after  fifty  years." 

Turn  to  the  constitution  of  the  French  Republic.  There  you 
have  a  Senate  and  a  Chamber  of  Representatives  co-ordinate  in 
respect  of  legislative  power,  except  that  the  Senate  has  no  initiative 
in  matters  of  finance.  The  power  of  demanding  a  dissolution  of 
the  Chamber  does  not  rest  with  the  Prime  Minister,  but  with  the 
President  acting  with  the  consent  of  the  Senate.  And  the  Senate, 
according  to  a  recent  authority,  does  very  valuable  work  in  correct- 
ing the  over-hasty  legislation  of  the  Chamber,  and,  in  case  of  dis- 
agreement, often  has  its  own  way,  or  effects  a  compromise. 

Lastly,  I  take  the  Australian  Commonwealth.  I  think  that  the 
democratic  character  of  the  Australian  Colonies  can  hardly  be 
called  in  question.  But  there  is  a  difference  in  the  two  Chambers 
of  the  Australian  Commonwealth.  The  procedure  is  as  follows : 
The  House  of  Representatives  passes  a  proposed  law,  and  if  the 
Senate  rejects  or  amends  it  in  any  way  to  which  the  House  of 
Representatives  cannot  agree,  the  Bill  drops  for  the  time.  It  comes 
up  again  after  three  months,  and  if  the  Senate  still  disagrees,  the 
Governor  may  dissolve  both  Houses.  If  afterwards  the  same  dif- 
ference arises,  and  the  disagreement  still  goes  on,  then  the  two 
Houses  sit  together  and  the  opinion  of  the  majority  of  the  whole 
number  prevails. 

There  you  have  three  great  modem  democracies,  each  of  which 
guards  itself  against  such  legislation  as  might  well  be  effected  by 
this  House  of  Commons,  if  it  received  the  unlimited  powers  which 


462  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

are  proposed  to  be  given  to  it  by  the  Prime  Minister.  I  venture  to 
think  that  there  is  nothing  pedantic  in  loolving  at  the  actions,  the 
law,  and  the  practice  of  other  constitutions  as  democratic  as  our 
own.  If  these  safeguards  are  necessary  for  them,  they  are  neces- 
sary for  us.  If  they  cannot  trust  a  single  Chamber,  we  may  learn 
from  them  how  to  guard  against  the  possibilities  of  a  House  of 
Commons  whose  powers  were  limitless. 

But  setting  aside  those  examples,  if  we  look  simply  at  the  pro- 
posals of  the  Prime  Minister,  these  two  questions  arise.  What  are 
the  faults  of  the  House  of  Lords  that  they  should  be  superseded 
and  set  aside  in  this  way,  and  what  is  the  claim  of  the  House  of 
Commons  to  arrogate  to  itself  this  unbounded  legislative  power  ? 
Now,  I  am  perfectly  ready  to  admit  that  the  House  of  Lords  has 
its  faults  as  a  Second  Chamber ;  but  it  was  never  constructed  to 
discharge  the  purposes  of  a  Second  Chamber  in  the  modern  sense  ; 
it  is,  historically,  the  estate  of  the  baronage,  a  co-ordinate  estate  of 
the  realm  with  the  House  of  Commons.  It  has  become  a  Second 
Chamber,  I  admit,  and  to  my  mind  discharges  extremely  well 
many  of  the  duties  of  a  Second  Chamber.  I  admit  that  it  is  too 
large,  that  it  contains  too  many  men  who  take  no  active  part  in 
politics,  and  that,  like  every  Second  Chamber  that  can  be  devised, 
it  is  conservative  in  its  tendencies,  because  the  very  object  of  the 
existence  of  a  Second  Chamber  is  to  preserve  the  nation  from  the 
over-hasty  legislation  of  the  other  House.  But  I  will  undertake  to 
say  that  the  House  of  Lords  has  never  crossed  the  will  of  the 
people  where  that  will  has  been  clearly  expressed.  Take  any  in- 
stance since  the  Reform  Act  of  1832,  which  you  may  say  is  the 
beginning  of  our  modem  constitution.  Take  cases  in  which  it  was 
extremely  possible  that  a  majority  of  the  House  of  Lords  were  not 
wholly  in  accord  with  the  legislation  that  was  passed.  Take  the 
disestablishment  of  the  Irish  Church,  the  Irish  land  legislation  of 
Mr.  Gladstone,  the  changes  in  the  franchise  of  1884-1885,  or  the 
Trade  Disputes  Bill  of  last  year.  On  every  one  of  these  measures 
the  country  had  clearly  expressed  its  opinion.  .  .  . 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  463 

Why  do  you  not  take  the  measures  which  are  open  to  you  to 
ascertain  the  will  of  the  people  ?  The  Under-Secretary  for  the 
Colonies  [Mr.  Winston  Churchill]  wrote  an  article  in  the  Nation 
in  which  he  expressed  his  view  as  to  the  constitution  of  a  Sec- 
ond Chamber,  and  his  view  is  not  the  view  of  the  Prime  Minister. 
The  Under-Secretary  thinks  that  the  Ministry  should  constitute  a 
Second  Chamber  to  suit  their  own  purposes  at  the  commencement 
of  every  Parliament,  for  he  wrote : 

Since  the  political  supremacy  of  the  House  of  Commons  must  be  the 
vital  characteristic  of  any  Liberal  scheme,  we  must  reject  with  regret,  but 
with  decision,  all  proposals  for  enabling  the  House  of  Lords  to  force  every 
Liberal  measure  to  the  test  of  a  referendum.  Such  a  provision  would  be 
contrary  to  the  whole  spirit  of  the  British  Constitution. 

The  Under-Secretary  for  the  Colonies  maintains  that  the  refer- 
endum is  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  British  Constitution.  There 
is  a  curiously  undemocratic  ring  about  that.  I  thought  the  Party 
opposite  were  going  to  breathe  a  new  spirit  into  the  Constitution, 
but  it  seems  that  while  we  may  abolish  the  House  of  Lords  with- 
out reference  to  the  people,  yet  that  to  consult  the  people  on  any 
great  legislative  measure  on  which  their  opinion  is  not  ascertained 
is  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution.  I  urge  hon.  Members 
opposite  not  to  disguise  the  full  effect  of  what  is  being  proposed. 
The  proposition  is  this  —  that  when  the  House  of  Commons  is 
once  elected  it  shall  do  as  it  likes  and  that  the  people  shall  be 
powerless.  You  say  to  the  people,  "  When  you  have  once  elected 
us  the  virtue  is  gone  out  of  you  ;  for  five  years  we  are  your  mas- 
ters ;  at  the  end  of  that  time  you  may  enjoy  a  brief  opportunity 
of  expressing  a  will  of  your  own." 

I  doubt  whether  the  country  desires  this  great  change,  and  I  feel 
sure  that  when  the  matter  is  clearly  placed  before  them  they  will 
express  a  very  decided  opinion  upon  it.  If  the  Lords  have  trav- 
ersed the  will  of  the  people,  and  resisted  reasonable  suggestions  for 
a  reform  of  that  Chamber,  then  you  may  appeal  to  the  country  on 
those  grounds.     But  what  you  are  asking  us  to  do  is  to  forego  the 


464  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

safeguards  which  all  the  democracies  in  the  world  have  found  to 
be  necessary ;  and'  to  have  nothing  between  the  will  of  the  House 
of  Commons  and  the  veto  of  the  Crown.  Put  this  question  plainly 
to  the  country ;  you  will  get  a  clear  answer,  and  I  have  no  doubt 
as  to  what  the  answer  will  be. 


Extract  75 

THE   ISSUE  BETWEEN  THE  HOUSES  AND   THE  PARTIES 

(Air.  Winston  CliiDxhill^  Under-SecretcDy  of  State  for  the  Colonies, 
Commons^  fitne  i'j,  igoy) 

Mr.  Churchill  ^ :  .  .  .  We  are  only  at  the  beginning  of  this 
struggle.  We  are  not  necessarily  committed  to  every  detail  of 
the  proposal ;  we  are  opening  the  first  lines  for  a  great  siege,  we 
have  to  sap  up  to  the  advanced  parallels,  to  establish  our  batteries, 
and  at  no  distant  date  open  our  bombardment.  It  may  be  many 
months  before  we  shall  be  able  to  discern  where  there  is  a  prac- 
ticable breach,  but  the  assault  will  come  in  due  time. 

The  right  hon.  Gentleman  opposite  said  he  welcomed  this  con- 
test with  great  confidence.  I  wonder  if  hon.  Members  opposite 
realise,  to  use  an  e.xpressive  vulgarism,  what  they  are  "  letting 
themselves  in  for  "  when  this  question  comes  to  be  fought  out  on 
every  platform  in  every  constituency  in  the  country.  They  will 
not  have  to  defend  an  ideal  Second  Chamber ;  they  will  not  be 
able  to  confine  themselves  to  airy  generalities  about  a  bi-cameral 
system  and  its  advantages ;  they  will  have  to  defend  this  Second 
Chamber  as  it  is  —  one-sided,  hereditary,  unpurged,  unrepresenta- 
tive, irresponsible,  absentee.  They  will  have  to  defend  it  with  all 
its  anomalies,  all  its  absurdities,  and  all  its  personal  bias ;  they  will 
have  to  defend  it  with  all  its  achievements  that  have  darkened  the 
pages  of  the  history  of  England.    And  let  me  say  that  considerable 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  176,  col.  1243  sqq. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  465 

constitutional  authorities  liave  not  considered  that  the  policy  on 
which  we  have  embarked  in  moving  this  Resolution  is  unreason- 
able. Mr.  Bagehot  says  of  the  House  of  Lords :  "  It  may  lose  its 
veto  as  the  Crown  has  lost  its  veto.  If  most  of  its  members  neglect 
their  duties,  if  all  its  members  continue  to  be  of  one  class,  and  that 
not  quite  the  best ;  if  its  doors  are  shut  against  genius  that  cannot 
found  a  family,  and  ability  which  has  not  ^{^5000  a  year,  its  power 
will  be  less  year  by  year,  and  at  last  be  gone,  as  so  much  kingly 
power  is  gone  —  no  one  knows  how."  .   .  . 

Has  the  House  of  Lords  ever  been  right  ? 

Major  Anstruther-Gray  :  What  about  Home  Rule  ? 

Mr.  Churchill  :  Has  it  ever  been  right  in  any  of  the  great 
settled  controversies  which  are  now  beyond  the  reach  of  Party 
argument  ?  Was  it  right  in  delaying  Catholic  emancipation  and 
the  removal  of  Jewish  disabilities  ?  Was  it  right  in  driving  this 
country  to  the  verge  of  revolution  in  the  effort  to  secure  the  pas- 
sage of  reform  ?  Was  it  right  in  resisting  the  Ballot  Bill  ?  Was  it 
right  in  the  almost  innumerable  efforts  it  made  to  prevent  this 
House  dealing  with  the  purity  of  its  own  electoral  machinery  ? 
Was  it  right  in  endeavouring  to  prevent  the  abolition  of  purchase 
in  the  Army?  Was  it  right  in  1880,  when  it  rejected  the  Compen- 
sation for  Disturbance  Bill  ?  I  defy  the  Party  opposite  to  produce 
a  single  instance  of  a  settled  controversy  in  which  the  House  of 
Lords  was  right. 

Major  Anstruther-Gray  :  What  about  Home  Rule  ? 

Mr.  Churchill  :  I  expected  that  interruption.  That  is  not  a 
settled  controversy.  It  is  a  matter  which  lies  in  the  future.  The 
cases  I  have  mentioned  are  cases  where  we  have  carried  the  law 
into  effect  and  have  seen  the  results  and  found  that  they  have 
been  good.  .  .  . 

But  there  is  one  other  feature  in  the  House  of  Lords  which  the 
Conservative  party  will  have  to  exercise  their  ingenuity  in  defend- 
ing in  the  next  few  years  —  I  allude  to  the  presence  in  that  body 
of  those  interesting  Lords  Spiritual.    By  what  violation  of  all  ideas 


466  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  religious  equality  the  leaders  of  one  denomination  only  should 
be  represented  I  do  not  pause  to  inquire ;  but  no  doubt  when 
such  very  delicate  and  ticklish  questions  as  Chinese  labour  and  the 
prevalence  of  intemperance,  and  great  questions  of  war  and  the 
treatment  of  native  races  beyond  the  seas  come  up,  it  is  a  very 
convenient  thing  to  have  the  Bishops  in  the  House  of  Lords  in 
order  to  make  quite  sure  that  official  Christianity  shall  be  on  the 
side  of  the  upper  classes. 

I  proceed  to  inquire  on  what  principle  the  House  of  Lords  deals 
with  Liberal  measures.  The  right  hon.  Member  for  IJover  says 
they  occupy  the  position  of  the  umpire.  Are  they  even  a  sieve,  a 
strainer,  to  stop  legislation  if  it  should  reveal  an  undue  or  undesir- 
able degree  of  radicalism  or  Socialism  ?  Are  they  the  complemen- 
tary critic  —  the  critic  who  sees  all  the  things  which  the  ordinary 
man  does  not  see  ?  I  say  that  the  attitude  which  the  House  of 
Lords  adopts  towards  Liberal  measures  is  purely  tactical.  When 
they  returned  to  their  "  gilded  Chamber  "  after  the  general  election 
they  found  on  the  Woolsack  and  on  the  Treasury  Bench  a  Lord 
Chancellor  and  a  Government  with  which  they  were  not  familiar. 
When  their  eyes  fell  upon  those  objects  there  was  a  light  in  them 
which  meant  one  thing  — -  murder  ;  murder  tempered,  no  doubt, 
by  those  prudential  considerations  w^hich  always  restrain  persons 
from  acts  which  are  contrary  to  the  general  feeling  of  the  society 
in  w-hich  they  live.  But  their  attitude  towards  the  present  Govern- 
ment has  from  the  beginning  been  to  select  the  best  and  most 
convenient  opportunity  of  humiliating  and  discrediting  them,  and 
finally  of  banishing  them  from  power.   .   .   . 

The  House  of  Lords  as  it  at  present  exists  and  acts  is  not  a 
national  institution,  but  a  Party  dodge,  an  apparatus  and  instrument 
at  the  disposal  of  one  political  faction  ;  and  it  is  used  in  the  most 
unscrupulous  manner  to  injure  and  humiliate  the  opposite  faction. 
When  hon.  Gentlemen  opposite  go  about  the  country  defending  a 
Second  Chamber,  let  them  remember  that  this  is  the  kind  of  Second 
Chamber  they  have  to  defend,  and  when  they  defend  the  veto  let 


CURBING  THE  LORDS  467 

them  remember  that  it  is  a  veto  used,  not  for  national  purposes, 
but  for  the  grossest  and  basest  purposes  of  unscrupulous  political 
partisanship. 

I  have  dealt  with  the  issues  between  Houses,  and  I  come  to 
that  between  Parties.  .  .  .  Constitutional  writers  have  much  to 
say  about  the  estates  of  the  realm,  and  a  great  deal  to  say  about 
their  relation  to  each  other  and  to  the  Sovereign.  All  that  is  found 
to  be  treated  at  length.  But  they  say  very  little  about  the  Party 
system.  And,  after  all,  the  Party  system  is  the  dominant  fact  in 
our  experience.  .  .  .  There  are  two  great  characteristics  about  the 
Party  institutions  of.  this  country :  the  equipoise  between  them, 
and  their  almost  incredible  durability.  We  have  only  to  look  at 
the  general  elections  of  1900  and  1906.  I  do  not  suppose  any 
circumstances  could  be  more  depressing  for  a  political  Party  than 
the  circumstances  in  which  the  Liberal  party  fought  the  election 
in  1900,  except  the  circumstances  in  which  the  Conservative  party 
fought  the  election  of  1906.  At  those  two  elections,  what  was 
the  salient  fact  ?  The  great  mass  of  the  voters  of  each  political 
Party  stood  firm  by  the  standard  of  their  Party,  and  although 
there  was  an  immense  movement  of  public  opinion,  that  move- 
ment was  actually  effected  by  a  comparatively  small  number  of 
votes.  .  .  .  When  Parties  are  thus  evenly  balanced,  to  place  such 
a  weapon  as  the  House  of  Lords  in  the  hands  of  one  of  the 
Parties  is  to  doom  the  other  to  destruction.  I  do  not  speak  only 
from  the  Party  point  of  view,  although  it  explains  the  earnestness 
with  which  we  approach  this  question.  It  is  a  matter  of  life  and 
death  to  Liberalism  and  Radicalism.  It  is  a  question  of  our  life 
or  the  abolition  of  the  veto  of  the  House  of  Lords.  But  look 
at  it  from  a  national  point  of  view.  Think  of  its  injury  to  the 
smooth  working  of  a  Liberal  Government.  At  the  present  time  a 
Liberal  Government,  however  powerful,  cannot  look  far  ahead, 
cannot  impart  design  into  its  operations,  because  it  knows  that  if 
at  any  moment  its  vigour  falls  below  a  certain  point,  another  body, 
over  which  it  has  no  control,  is  ready  to  strike  it  a  blow  to  its 


468  RRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

most  serious  injury.  It  comes  to  this,  that  no  matter  how  great 
the  majority  by  which  a  Liberal  Government  is  supported,  it  is 
unable  to  pass  any  legislation  unless  it  can  procure  the  agreement 
of  its  political  opponents.   .   .   . 

Much  might  be  said  for  and  against  the  two-Party  system.  But 
no  one  can  doubt  that  it  adds  to  the  stability  and  cohesion  of  the 
State.  The  alternation  of  Parties  in  power,  like  the  rotation  of 
crops,  has  beneficial  results.  Each  of  the  two  Parties  has  some- 
thing to  give  and  services  to  render  in  the  development  of  the 
national  life,  and  the  succession  of  new  and  different  points  of 
view  is  a  great  and  real  benefit  to  the  country.  The  advantage 
of  such  a  system  cannot  be  denied.  Would  not  the  ending  of  such 
a  system  involve  a  much  greater  disturbance  than  to  amend  the 
functions  of  the  House  of  Lords  .''  Is  there  not  a  much  greater 
cataclysm  involved  in  the  breakdown  of  the  constitutional  organi- 
sation of  democracy,  for  that  is  the  issue  which  is  placed  before 
us,  than  would  be  involved  in  the  mere  curtailment  of  the  legisla- 
tive veto  which  has  been  given  to  another  place  ?  1  ask  the  House, 
What  does  such  a  safeguard  as  the  House  of  Lords  mean  ?  Is  it 
a  safeguard  at  all  ?  .  .   . 

Great  powers  are  already  possessed  by  the  House  of  Commons. 
It  has  finance  under  its  control ;  it  has  the  Executive  Government ; 
the  control  of  foreign  affairs  and  the  great  patronage  of  the  State 
are  all  in  the  power  of  the  House  of  Commons  at  the  present  time. 
And  let  me  say  that  if  you  are  to  proceed  on  the  basis  that  the 
people  of  this  country  will  elect  a  mad  House  of  Commons,  and 
that  the  mad  House  of  Commons  will  be  represented  by  a  mad  ex- 
ecutive, the  House  of  Lords  is  no  guarantee  against  any  excesses 
which  such  a  House  of  Commons  or  such  an  Executive  might 
have  in  contemplation.  Whatever  you  may  wish  or  desire,  you  will 
be  forced  to  trust  the  people  in  all  those  vital  and  fundamental 
elements  of  government  which  in  every  State  have  always  been 
held  to  involve  the  social  stability  of  the  community. 

Is  the  House  of  Lords  even  a  security  for  property  ?  \Miy,  the 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  469 

greatest  weapon  which  a  democracy  possesses  against  property  is 
tlie  power  of  taxation,  and  the  power  of  taxation  is  wholly  under 
the  control  of  this  House.  If  this  House  chooses,  for  instance,  to 
suspend  payment  to  the  Sinking  Fund  and  to  utilise  the  money 
for  any  public  purpose  or  for  any  social  purpose,  the  House  of 
Lords  could  not  interfere.  If  the  House  of  Commons  chooses  to 
double  taxation  on  the  wealthy  classes,  the  House  of  Lords  could 
not  interfere  in  any  respect.  LTnderstand,  I  am  not  necessarily 
advocating  these  measures ;  what  I  am  endeavouring  to  show  to 
the  House  is  that  there  is  no  real  safeguard  in  the  House  of  Lords 
even  in  regard  to  a  movement  against  property. 

But  surel)'  there  are  other  securities  upon  which  the  stability  of 
society  depends.  In  the  ever-increasing  complexities  of  social  prob- 
lems, in  the  restrictions  which  are  imposed  from  day  to  day  with 
increasing  force  on  the  action  of  individuals,  above  all  in  the  dis- 
semination of  property  among  many  classes  of  the  population,  are 
the  real  elements  of  stability  on  which  our  modern  society  depends. 
There  are  to-day,  unlike  in  former  ages,  actually  millions  of  people 
who  possess  not  merely  inert  property,  but  who  possess  rent- 
earning,  profit-bearing  property ;  and  the  danger  with  which  we 
are  confronted  now  is  not  at  all  whether  we  shall  go  too  fast ;  no, 
the  danger  is  that  about  three-fourths  of  the  people  of  this  country 
should  move  on  in  a  comfortable  manner  into  an  easy  life,  which, 
with  all  its  ups  and  downs,  is  not  uncheered  by  fortune,  while  the 
remainder  of  the  people  shall  be  left  to  rot  and  fester  in  the  slums 
of  our  cities,  or  in  the  deserted  and  abandoned  hamlets  of  our 
rural  districts.  That  is  the  danger  with  which  we  are  confronted 
at  the  present  moment,  and  it  invests  with  a  deep  and  real  signifi- 
cance the  issue  which  is  drawn  between  the  two  Parties  to-night. 
It  is  quite  true  that  there  are  rich  Members  of  the  Liberal  party, 
and  there  are  poor  men  who  are  Members  of  the  Conservative 
party,  but  in  the  main  the  lines  of  difference  between  the  two 
Parties  are  social  and  economic  —  in  the  main  the  lines  of  differ- 
ence are  increasingly  becoming  the  lines  of  cleavage  between  the 


47©  BRITISH  SOCIAL  POLITICS 

rich  and  the  poor.  Let  that  animate  and  inspire  us  in  the  great 
struggle  which  we  are  now  undertaking,  and  in  which  we  shall 
without  rest  press  forward,  confident  of  this,  that,  if  we  persevere 
we  shall  wrest  from  the  hands  of  privilege  and  wealth  the  evil  and 
ugly  and  sinister  weapon  of  the  Peers'  veto,  which  they  have  used 
so  ill  so  long. 

Extract  yd 

AN  ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  LORDS 

{Mr.  David  Lloyd  George,  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade, 
Coimjions,  ftine  26,  IQ07) 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  ^ :  .  .  .  Then  there  is  property.  You  must 
defend  property !  The  only  Bill  that  I  can  recall  which  deprived 
anybody  of  property  without  compensation  was  passed  by  the 
Leader  of  the  Opposition.  It  was  valuable  public  property,  the  re- 
version to  the  public  of  the  licences,  recognised  by  law  as  a  vested 
interest.  True,  it  was  only  a  vested  interest  for  the  benefit  of  the 
public,  not  of  a  class.  That  property  the  right  hon.  Gentleman 
wiped  out,  nay,  he  handed  it  over  as  a  political  bribe  to  a  power- 
ful section  of  the  community.  It  was  the  greatest  act  of  plunder 
and  confiscation  since  the  days  of  Henry  VIII.  The  House  of 
Lords  consented.  This  is  the  defender  of  property !  This  is  the 
leal  and  trusty  mastiff  which  is  to  watch  over  our  interests,  but 
which  runs  away  at  the  first  snarl  of  the  trade  unions. 

Viscount  Turnour  :  What  about  your  Party  ? 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  We  did  what  we  promised  at  the  last 
election.  A  mastiff  ?  It  is  the  right  hon.  Gentleman's  poodle.  It 
fetches  and  carries  for  him.  It  barks  for  him.  It  bites  anybody 
that  he  sets  it  on  to.  And  we  are  told  that  this  is  a  great  revising 
Chamber,  the  safeguard  of  liberty  in  the  country.  Talk  about  mock- 
eries and  shams.   Was  there  ever  such  a  sham  as  that  ?    No  wonder 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  176,  col.  1429  sqq. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  471 

the  right  hon.  Gentleman  scolds  the  naughty  boys  who  throw  stones 
at  it.  The  House  of  Lords,  it  seems,  defends  capital.  Of  a  kind, 
yes.  But  generally  against  whom  does  it  defend  capital  ?  Against 
the  House  of  Commons  ?    Why  should  this  House  destroy  capital .' 

Viscount  Turnour  interposed  an  observation  which  did  not 
reach  the  gallery. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  The  noble  Lord  represents  land,  but  it  is 
not  the  only  form  of  capital,  though  it  is  the  only  form  you  cannot 
scare  away.  The  noble  Lord  finds  some  comfort  in  that.  We  are 
told,  too,  that  the  House  of  Lords  defends  capital.  Why  should 
the  House  of  Commons  be  supposed  to  be  in  a  conspiracy  against 
capital .'  The  Th/ies  the  other  day  talked  about  the  danger  to 
property  of  an  absolute  House  of  Commons. 

Has  it  ever  occurred  to  the  Times  that  practically  every  profes- 
sion, every  great  trade,  every  great  industry,  no  matter  what  Party 
is  in  power,  sends  its  very  best  men  to  the  House  of  Commons  ?  I 
can  say  without  hesitation  about  the  House  of  Commons  that  this 
is  true.  All  the  great  industries,  the  land,  shipping,  mining,  textile 
trades,  the  iron  trade  and  every  great  industry  and  interest  in  this 
country,  are  represented  by  men  who  have  devoted  their  lives  to 
those  particular  industries  before  they  were  elected  to  the  House  of 
Commons.  The  other  Chamber  represents  substantially  only  one 
form  of  capital.  Yet  it  claims  that  it  has  to  watch  in  the  interest 
of  property  the  House  of  Commons,  which  is  composed  of  men 
engaged  in  every  form  of  industry  and  commerce,  to  which  they 
devote  their  services,  and  out  of  which  they  make  their  livelihoods. 
That  being  so,  is  it  not  folly  and  nonsense  to  talk  of  the  House  of 
Lords  being  necessary  to  protect  property  ? 

I  know  of  only  one  Bill  passed  in  the  last  few  years  which 
represents  a  great  inroad  upon  the  profits  of  capital.  That  is  the 
Workmen's  Compensation  Act.  I  do  not  say  it  is  unjust,  save  in 
one  particular ;  but  the  exception  is  important.  Suppose  there  is 
an  accident  in  a  colliery.  The  man  who  has  put  his  capital  into  its 
development  may  lose  every  penny.    But  the  man  who  derives  his 


472  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

income  out  of  royalties  from  the  same  colliery  has  not  to  risk  a 
farthing.  Is  not  that  unfair  ?  Yet  it  is  that  injustice  —  the  absence 
of  a  provision  to  make  royalties  pay  their  fair  contribution  towards 
these  accidents  —  which  enabled  the  Bill  to  pass  through  the  As- 
sembly which  is  supposed  to  be  the  special  protection  of  capital. 

It  is  also  well  known  that  the  House  of  Lords  has  plundered  the 
railways  to  a  huge  extent.  Railways  have  cost  twice  more  in  this 
country  than  in  any  other  country  in  the  world.  Why?  Because 
the  House  of  Lords  has  piled  the  cost  onto  the  railways  when 
they  came  to  acquire  land ;  and  now  the  trade  and  industry  and 
capital  of  the  country  have  to  pay  heavily  on  account  of  the  action  of 
this  Chamber  which  is  supposed  to  be  our  appointed  guardian.  .  .  . 

The  argument  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  has  used  in  re- 
gard to  administration  is  doubly  important  when  it  comes  to  legis- 
lation. The  right  hon.  Gentleman  knows  perfectly  well  what  the 
object  is  —  no  revision,  no  check,  when  a  Tory  Government  is  in 
power,  but  every  check  when  there  is  a  Liberal  Government  in 
power.  He  is  afraid  of  a  revolution.  If  there  is  a  revolution,  it  is 
not  the  House  of  Lords  that  will  arrest  it.  It  will  be  the  first  in- 
stitution that  will  vanish  without  a  struggle.  In  the  English  revolu- 
tion it  was  the  House  of  Commons  that  made  the  last  fight.  The 
House  of  Lords  was  abolished  by  a  Resolution.  The  House  of 
Commons  made  the  fight,  and  when  the  time  for  a  revolution 
comes  —  if  it  ever  does  come  —  the  only  share  which  the  House 
of  Lords  will  have  in  the  revolution  will  be  in  creating  it. 

The  right  hon.  Gentleman  the  Member  for  West  Birmingham 
[Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain]  has  pointed  this  out  in  one  of  his  most 
powerful  passages  —  and  this  is  the  answer  to  his  followers  who 
now  ask  when  the  House  of  Lords  have  done  any  harm  —  "  We 
know  for  our  part  that  in  the  course  of  the  last  hundred  )'ears  they 
have  more  than  once  brought  the  country  to  the  verge  of  revo- 
lution ;  and  that  they  have  again  and  again  mutilated,  delayed,  or 
rejected  Bills  of  the  first  importance  which  are  now  universally 
accepted  to  be  salutary  and  expedient."    But  the  people  are  slow 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  473 

to  embark  on  revolutions,  and  the  fact  that  it  has  taken  fifty  or 
sixty  years  to  curtail  the  powers  of  the  House  of  Lords  is  the 
best  proof  of  that.  They  are  tolerant  of  long-standing  grievances. 
No  one  can  doubt  their  wrongs.  But  I  know  the  people ;  I  was 
brought  up  amongst  them.  It  is  only  when  they  are  driven  by  a 
long  course  of  injustice  and  of  denial  of  justice  that  they  are  ever 
exasperated  into  a  revolution,  and  the  surest  and  greatest  security 
against  that  is  not  the  House  of  Lords,  but  some  machinery  which 
will  deal  effectively,  promptly,  and  justly  with  their  requirements. 
It  is  very  remarkable  that  every  great  Liberal  statesman  who 
has  ruled  this  Empire  for  fifty  years  has  always  come  to  the  same 
conclusion  about  the  House  of  Lords.  I  have  quoted  the  right 
hon.  Gentleman  the  Member  for  West  Birmingham.  Lord  Rose- 
bery,  in  language  no  less  strong,  came  to  the  same  conclusion,  and 
the  two  greatest  names  of  all  —  John  Bright  and  Mr.  Gladstone  — 
who  had  given  long  service  to  the  State  and  who  were  no  revolu- 
tionaries, were  of  the  same  opinion.  John  Bright,  although  he  has 
been  denounced  in  language  stronger  than  even  the  present  Prime 
Minister,  was  a  prudent,  cautious,  and  temperate  man  in  action, 
and  always  essentially  anti-revolutionary.  Mr.  Gladstone  had  an 
almost  exaggerated  reverence  for  existing  institutions,  especially 
hereditary  institutions.  He  was  the  last  man  to  lift  his  powerful 
arm  against  them,  and  yet  after  the  longest  and  most  distinguished 
public  career  that  this  country  probably  has  known,  when  he  had 
no  further  personal  interest  in  the  matter,  and  when  he  had  no 
responsibility  for  the  leadership  of  the  Party,  he  said  that  practically 
progress  was  impossible  until  you  had  dealt  with  this  barrier.  The 
present  Prime  Minister,  who  after  all  has  had  a  longer  experience 
of  Parliamentary  life  than  any  man  here,  comes  and  deliberately 
asks  the  House  of  Commons,  and  from  the  Commons  appeals  to 
the  country,  to  accept  the  counsel  given  at  the  end  of  a  great  career 
by  a  statesman  who  stands  to-day  not  merely  in  the  British  Empire 
but  throughout  the  world  as  the  man  who  embodies  the  noblest  and 
the  most  exalted  traditions  of  British  statesmanship. 


474  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  yy 

EXPOSITION  OF  THE  PARLIAMENT  BILL 

[Earl  of  Creive,  Lord  Privy  Seal  and  Secretary  of  State  for  India, 
Lords,  November  21,  rgio) 

The  Earl  of  Crewe  ^:  ...  In  regard  to  the  Parliament  Bill, 
the  origin  of  this  particular  controversy  goes  back  four  years.  It 
goes  back  to  the  winter  of  1906  when  the  first  Education  Bill  of 
Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman's  Government  failed  to  pass  into 
law.  The  Bill  failed  to  pass  into  law  after  strenuous  attempts  to 
arrive  at  a  compromise,  but  compromise  was  found  impossible  and 
the  Bill  was  lost.  It  was  lost  owing  to  the  unwillingness  of  your 
Lordships'  House  to  include  in  its  provisions  principles  upon  which, 
as  we  believed,  the  mind  of  the  country  had  been  most  clearly  ex- 
pressed at  the  General  Election  of  the  preceding  winter,  and,  as 
your  Lordships  will  all  remember,  its  loss  was  received  not  merely 
with  regret  but  with  no  little  indignation  on  the  part  of  those  who 
had  its  success  at  heart.  On  December  20,  1906,  Sir  Henry 
Campbell-Bannerman,  speaking  in  another  place,  said,  "  A  way 
must  be  found  and  a  way  will  be  found  by  which  the  will  of  the 
people,  as  expressed  through  their  elected  representatives  in  this 
House,  will  be  made  to  prevail."  Then  in  the  King's  Speech, 
when  Parliament  met  on  February  12  in  the  following  year,  that 
thesis  was  developed  by  the  then  Prime  Minister  in  words  which 
will  be  found  in  the  pages  of  "  Hansard."  The  almost  immedi- 
ate sequel  to  that  challenge,  for  I  think  I  may  so  call  it,  was  the 
Resolution  which  the  House  of  Commons  passed  on  June  26  of 
the  same  year.    That  Resolution  read : 

That  in  order  to  give  effect  to  the  will  of  the  people  as  expressed  by 
their  elected  representatives,  it  is  necessary  that  the  power  of  the  other 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fifth  Series,  Lords,  vol,  6,  col.  •/■j'j  sqq. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  475 

House  to  alter  or  reject  Bills  passed  by  this  House  should  be  so  restricted 
by  law  as  to  secure  that  within  the  limits  of  a  single  Parliament  the  final 
decisions  of  the  Commons  shall  prevail. 

That  Resolution  was  carried  on  a  Division  by  434  against  149. 

Perhaps  I  may  be  permitted  very  briefly  to  remind  your  Lord- 
ships of  what  the  terms  of  the  plan  at  that  time  were.  Speaking 
generally  they  were  these.  When  a  disagreement  occurred  between 
the  two  Houses  a  private  Conference  was  to  take  place ;  and  if 
agreement  was  not  arrived  at  through  that  Conference,  the  Bill  was 
lost  for  the  time.  It  could  be  reintroduced  either  with  or  without 
amendment  after  a  period  of  six  months,  and  if  the  two  Houses 
again  failed  to  agree,  a  second  Conference  was  to  be  called.  If 
agreement  was  then  not  reached,  the  Bill  was  to  be  reintroduced 
and  passed  by  some  rapid  process,  and  a  third  Conference  might 
be  held,  but  if  agreement  was  then  not  reached,  the  Bill  was  to 
become  law  over  the  heads  of  your  Lordships'  House.  The  re- 
mainder of  the  plan  consisted  in  a  provision  for  quinquennial 
Parliaments  —  that  is  to  say.  Parliaments  of  which  the  ordinary 
duration  would  be  four  years,  for  reasons  with  which  your  Lord- 
ships are  all  familiar. 

Well,  my  Lords,  as  the  controversy  proceeded,  the  relations 
as  between  the  two  Houses  I  fear  did  not  improve.  The  Plural 
Voting  Bill  had  already  been  rejected  by  your  Lordships'  House 
very  summarily,  and  not  less  summarily  the  Licensing  Bill  of  1908 
received  its  short  shrift  at  your  Lordships'  hands.  In  190S,  also, 
fresh  attempts  were  made  at  a  settlement  of  the  education  ques- 
tion, but  those  attempts  proved  to  be  again  a  failure.  Then 
came  the  unprecedented  rejection  in  1909  of  the  whole  financial 
arrangements  for  the  year.  The  General  Election  followed,  but 
the  Government,  although  returned  to  power,  found  itself  in  no 
degree  nearer  the  capacity  of  carrying  controversial  Bills  than  it 
had  been  all  through  the  Parliament  preceding.  That,  my  Lords, 
is  in  brief  the  reason  and  the  justification  for  the  introduction  of 
this  measure. 


476  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Now,  it  is  desirable  to  explain  in  what  essentials  this  Bill  differs 
from  the  earlier  proposals  which  I  have  described.  I  will  do  so 
by  going  rapidly  through  its  operative  provisions.  The  first  clause 
deals  with  finance.  It  gives  to  the  other  House  complete  control 
over  Money  Bills,  but  it  contains  the  important  provision  and  makes 
the  important  admission  on  which  your  Lordships  laid  stress  in  your 
famous  Standing  Order  of  1702  —  namely,  that  it  was  not  proper 
to  annex  to  a  Money  Bill  matter  foreign  to  or  different  from  matters 
of  aid  or  supply.  The  force  of  that  Standing  Order  is  admitted  in 
Clause  I,  and  the  decision  as  to  whether  a  Bill  is  a  Money  Bill  or 
not  is  left  by  Clause  i  to  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  — 
an  impartial  authority,  at  any  rate  an  impartial  authority  so  far  as 
the  memory  of  any  man  now  alive  goes  back,  and  to  whom  in  the 
opinion  of  His  Majesty's  Government  that  immensely  important 
duty  may  be  fitly  entrusted.  But  I  may  perhaps  venture  to  say 
that  if  some  other  tribunal  within  Parliament  could  be  found  which 
could  be  expected  to  carr)^  out  these  duties  with  equal  authority 
and  equal  impartiality,  that  is  not  a  matter  which  we  should  regard 
as  vital  to  the  Bill. 

The  second  part  of  the  Bill  deals  with  general  legislation,  and  the 
effect  of  its  provisions  is  that  if  a  measure  passes  in  another  place 
during  three  successive  sessions  spreading  over  two  years  it  will 
become  law.  In  the  earlier  proposals  much  was  said  about  confer- 
ring between  the  two  Houses,  and  it  is  a  matter  upon  which  the  late 
Prime  Minister  dwelt  at  length  when  he  introduced  his  proposals. 
The  Bill  which  is  before  us  does  not  explicitly  provide  for  the 
holding  of  Conferences,  but  in  the  opinion  of  the  framers  of  the  Bill 
the  holding  of  Conferences  is  a  cardinal  matter  in  relation  to  the 
whole  question.  Nothing,  I  think,  is  more  curious  to  any  one  who 
takes  the  trouble  to  look  at  the  history  of  the  relations  between  the 
two  Houses  than  the  gradual  decline  and  final  disuse  of  the  practice 
of  Conferences  between  the  Lords  and  the  Commons.  The  causes 
may  be  numerous,  but  one  cause  undoubtedly  was  that  the  later 
Conferences  which  were  held  —  I  am  speaking  for  the  moment  of 


CURBING  THE  LORDS  477 

formal  Conferences  —  seem  to  have  become  so  rigid  and  so  un- 
natural in  their  character  that  it  was  felt  that  the  practice  carried 
with  it  little  of  value.  But  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  in  my  opin- 
ion one  of  the  reasons  why  the  relations  between  the.  two  Houses 
have  hardened  and  crystallised  into  their  present  condition  —  a 
condition,  that  is  to  say,  of  something  like  perpetual  conflict  when 
one  Party  is  in  power  and  of  perpetual  acquiescence  when  the  other 
Party  is  in  power  —  may  be  traced  to  the  complete  abandonment  of 
this  habit  of  conferring.  Conferences  between  the  two  Houses  are 
of  old  date.  They  go  back,  I  believe,  to  the  reign  of  Edward  HI ; 
and  from  the  time  when  the  Commons'  Journals  were  regularly 
kept,  I  am  told  that  within  the  one  hundred  fifty  years  from  1547 
to  1702  anyone  who  searches  the  Index  to  these  Journals  will 
find  that  upwards  of  twenty  pages  of  the  Index  are  given  up  to 
reports  of  the  Conferences  that  were  held  between  the  two  Houses 
on  every  variety  of  subject  and 'covering  the  widest  possible  field. 
I  therefore  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  the  revival  of  the  custom  of 
frequent  Conferences  between  the  two  Houses  is  of  the  very  essence 
of  the  proposals  which  we  are  placing  before  your  Lordships  to-day. 
Then,  my  Lords,  I  would  call  your  attention  to  an  important 
change  from  the  former  proposals,  and  it  is  that  relating  to  the 
identity  of  the  Bill  to  be  sent  up  on  a  later  occasion  —  identity 
except  so  far  as  may  be  agreed  —  as  compared  with  the  proposal 
originally  made  that  the  Bill  might  be  amended  in  another  place 
and  sent  up  as  the  same  Bill.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  real  issue 
as  between  the  two  Parties  —  and  this  I  gather  from  what  has 
been  said  in  this  House  and  on  many  platforms  —  the  real  issue 
as  between  the  two  Parties  with  regard  to  these  proposals  is, 
"  What  is  the  real  value  of  delay  and  of  opportunities  for  con- 
sideration for  the  purpose  of  amending  Bills  ? "  That  is  to  say, 
Are  you  more  likely  to  get  a  Bill  into  final  shape  that  sensible 
men,  its  principle  having  been  approved,  will  agree  is  the  best 
shape  —  are  you  more  likely  to  get  it  into  such  a  shape  by  delay, 
consultation,  and  consideration  than   by  a   process  of  summary' 


478  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

rejection,  followed,  perhaps,  by  a  General  Election,  and  if  not 
by  a  General  Election  by  a  referendum,  as  I  understand  is  pro- 
posed in  a  Motion  on  the  Paper  by  my  noble  friend  Lord  Balfour 
of  Burleigh  ? 

It  is  useful  in  discussing  the  question  of  delay  and  consideration 
on  the  one  side,  and  a  more  immediate  appeal  to  the  country  on  the 
other,  for  the  purpose  of  improving  a  Bill  or  of  deciding  its  fate,  to 
consider  one  or  two  concrete  instances.  I  believe  it  is  to  the  benefit 
of  both  Parties,  and,  wJiat  is  more  important,  to  the  benefit  of  the 
whole  countr\',  to  get  out  of  the  region  of  abstract  Constitution- 
making,  because  what  the  country  is  most  interested  in  is,  "  What 
is  likely  to  be  the  effect  of  these  proposals  or  of  any  other  alterna- 
tive proposals  in  their  practical  import  and  in  relation  to  the  fate  of 
Bills  before  Parliament  ?  "  Now  Parliament  is  not  an  end  in  itself  ; 
it  is  a  means,  a  machine  for  doing  certain  things  for  the  nation. 
It  is  a  machine  for  doing  three  things.  It  exists  for  the  purpose 
of  keeping  a  check  on  the  Executive ;  it  exists  for  the  purpose  of 
raising  money  for  the  public  service ;  and  it  exists  also,  although  it 
is  not  its  primar}'  object  of  existence,  for  the  purpose  of  passing 
legislation.  I  ask  your  Lordships  to  consider  what  would  have  been 
the  probable  fate  of  one  or  two  well-known  measures  either  under 
our  proposals,  or  under  the  proposals  which  I  understand  to  be 
generally  those  of  the  other  side. 

I  will  take  the  first  Home  Rule  Bill  of  1893,  a  favourite  battle- 
horse,  I  need  not  say,  of  noble  Lords  opposite,  because  it  is  a 
measure  which  above  all  others  is  supposed  to  have  vindicated  the 
judgment  of  your  Lordships'  House.  I  say  without  hesitation  that 
the  Home  Rule  Bill  of  1893,  looking  back  at  it  from  this  distance 
of  time,  would  not  have  passed  either  test  —  it  would  not  have 
passed  the  test  of  a  General  Election  or  of  a  referendum,  which 
I  understand  would  be  the  proposal,  according  to  Mr.  Balfour's 
speech  at  Nottingham,  for  dealing  with  the  question.  Neither  would 
it  have  stood  the  test  of  the  proposals  under  the  Parliament  Bill. 
The  Home  Rule  Bill  of  1893,  supported  by  the  majority  with  which 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  479 

it  was  supported,  would  not  have  stood  the  test  in  the  then  temper 
of  the  countr)'  of  three  sessions  of  discussions.  Therefore,  I  think 
that  we  may  regard  ourselves  as  quits  as  to  the  merits  of  the  two 
systems  on  that  particular  question.  Then  I  will  take  a  Bill  of  noble 
Lords  opposite  —  the  Education  Act  of  1902.  I  presume  that  the 
Education  Act  of  1902  would  have  passed  this  House  very  much 
in  the  form  in  which  it  did  pass  for  the  simple  reason  that  even  if 
the  House  of  Lords  had  been  reformed  according  to  the  ideas  of 
noble  Lords,  it  would  not  have  become  the  subject  of  discussion 
between  the  two  Houses ;  but  if  Lord  Balfour's  plan  had  been  in 
force,  and  if  the  Act  of  1902  had  had  to  be  submitted  to  a  refer- 
endum, it  certainly  would  not  have  been  the  law  of  the  land  at  this 
moment.  Therefore  from  that  point  of  view  our  proposals,  I  think, 
are  kinder  to  the  legislation  of  noble  Lords  opposite  than  the  pro- 
posals of  a  distinguished  member  of  their  Party,  supported,  as  I 
understand,  by  many  other  distinguished  members. 

Next  I  come  to  the  Education  Bill  of  1906.  I  say  without  hesi- 
tation that  if  the  Education  Bill  of  1906  had  had  to  go  through  the 
processes  enjoined  by  this  Parliament  Bill,  it  would  have  come  out,  as 
I  believe,  a  satisfactoiy  measure,  and  a  measure  which  would  have 
given  us  a  settlement  of  our  elementary'  education  question  for  many 
years  to  come.  But  here  again  I  am  making  a  present  to  noble 
Lords  opposite,  because  if  that  Education  Bill  had  been  made  the 
subject  of  a  General  Election  or  of  a  referendum,  the  Bill  which 
would  have  been  put  to  the  country  would  have  been  the  Bill  in  its 
House  of  Commons  form.  That,  I  think,  is  quite  evident.  If  you 
differ  you  can  only  put  one  measure  to  the  country,  and  the  measure 
which  you  put  to  the  country,  is,  I  assume,  the  measure  as  it  passed 
the  House  of  Commons.  That  would  have  undoubtedly  involved 
the  carrying  of  the  Education  Bill  of  1906  in  a  form  which  would 
have  been  very  much  more  satisfactory  to  many  of  those  who  sup- 
port us  on  this  side  of  the  House,  and  very  much  less  satisfactory 
to  those  who  hold  the  views  of  the  noble  Lords  opposite.  I  venture 
to  think  that  the  Parliament  Bill  does  not  come  very  badly  out  of  a 


48o  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

comparison  of  those  three  cases ;  and  I  believe  that  noble  Lords 
opposite  have  not  attempted  to  realise  the  immense  effect  upon  a 
measure  of  delay  and  discussion  —  long  delay  and  repeated  discus- 
sion — -  both  in  another  place  and  here.  I  believe  that  in  this 
country,  as  far  as  we  are  able  to  know  the  mind  of  the  country,  the 
danger  of  anything  like  cataclysmic  legislation  is  an  absolute  mini- 
mum. Hurried  and  violent  legislation  is  in  my  view  thoroughly 
foreign  to  our  national  temperament.  And  if  noble  Lords  agree 
with  me,  it  is  hard  to  see  what  danger  they  find  in  our  proposals. 
But,  of  course,  noble  Lords  take  some  wild  speech  made  by  some 
quite  insignificant  person  and  point  to  it  as  indicating  the  probability 
that  revolutionary  changes  —  changes  of  the  kind  desired  by  the 
Social  Democratic  Party  —  are  likely  to  be  the  result  of  passing 
into  law  this  moderate  and  harmless  piece  of  legislation.  Well,  my 
Lords,  I  think  I  have  shown  that  to  describe  this  measure  as  in  any 
sense  a  measure  for  the  establishment  of  a  Single  Chamber  is  an 
absolute  misnomer.  If  there  is  anything  in  what  I  have  said  —  and 
I  shall  be  interested  to  see  if  noble  Lords  opposite  attempt  to  deny 
it  — •  as  to  the  power  and  force  of  delay  and  discussion,  this  is  not 
a  measure  for  the  establishment  of  a  Single  Chamber. 

To  this  policy  of  delay  and  discussion  various  alternatives  are 
suggested,  alternatives  which  may  themselves  involve  some  delay 
and  discussion,  but  which  cannot  be  taken  as  if  they  would  neces- 
sarily involve  the  same  amount  of  delay  and  discussion  as  we  have 
provided  for  in  this  Bill.  One  of  these  alternative  methods  of  pro- 
ceeding was  alluded  to  by  Mr.  Balfour  at  Nottingham.  It  is  what  is 
known  as  a  joint  sitting  —  that  is,  that  the  two  Houses  on  the  event 
of  disagreement  may  meet  and  the  combined  vote  of  both  Houses 
together  decides  the  question.  The  idea  of  holding  a  joint  session 
is  not  a  new  one,  and  I  am  very  far  from  saying  that  it  is  a  bad 
one.  I  ought  to  be  the  last  person  to  say  it  is  a  bad  one,  because, 
as  is  well  known  to  your  Lordships,  the  plan  of  a  Joint  Session 
forms  part  of  the  South  Africa  Act,  for  which  I  had  the  honour 
of  being  responsible  last  year.    Section  63  of  that  Act  provides  for 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  481 

the  holding  of  a  Joint  Session  in  case  of  difference.  But  I  am  bound 
to  point  out  this  :  that  when  you  talk  of  a  Joint  Session  between  the 
House  of  Commons  and  the  House  of  Lords,  however  constituted, 
the  problem  which  you  have  to  face  is  not  quite  the  same  as  that 
which  presents  itself  in  South  Africa.  The  two  Houses  in  South 
Africa  are  respectively  121  and  40  in  number.  For  them  to  meet 
and  discuss  is  a  comparatively  simple  affair.  But  when  you  come 
to  joining  to  a  House  of  670  members  another  House  which,  so  far 
as  I  am  able  to  gather,  may  be  at  least  400  in  number,  you  collect 
together  an  enormous  public  meeting ;  and  your  difficulty  is  not 
merely  the  physical  difficulty  of  getting  them  together,  but  the  intel- 
lectual difficulty  of  carrying  on  a  discussion  between  the  members 
of  a  body  so  enormous.  Therefore  in  a  country  like  this,  where 
both  Houses  are  large,  where  the  Party  system  prevails  to  the 
extent  that  it  does,  and  where  both  Houses  are  not  elected  Houses, 
the  system  of  Joint  Sessions  —  although,  as  I  say,  I  do  not  decry 
it  —  offers  difficulties  which  I  think  your  Lordships  ought  very  care- 
fully to  consider  before  you  plunge  into  it  as  a  definite  policy.  Your 
Lordships  must  also  remember  that  when  you  speak  of  a  Joint 
Session  much  depends  upon  the  numbers  of  the  Upper  and  more 
Conservative  House.  I  say  more  Conservative  House  because, 
without  entering  into  the  question  of  number  or  degree,  it  will,  I 
am  sure,  be  admitted  by  noble  Lords  opposite  that  they  mean  the 
Upper  House  to  be  Conservative  in  its  complexion.  Your  Joint 
Session,  in  that  case,  if  the  relative  numbers  of  the  Upper  House 
are  very  small,  may  come  much  nearer  to  Single-Chamber  Govern- 
ment than  the  proposals  which  we  are  now  putting  before  your 
Lordships.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  proportionate  numbers  of  the 
Conservative  House  are  going  to  be  very  large,  then  there  would 
not  seem  to  be  very  much  difference  between  the  future  position 
and  that  of  which  we  complain  to-day. 

I  do  not  propose  on  this  occasion  —  I  do  not  know  whether  we 
may  have  the  opportunity  of  doing  so  before  the  House  rises  —  to 
enter  into  the  question  of  the  referendum.    It  is  a  question  which, 


482  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

as  everybody  knows  who  has  attempted  to  study  it,  bristles  with 
difficulties.  But  here  again  I  would  just  ask  your  Lordships  to  con- 
sider this :  Are  you  quite  sure  that  the  clean-cut  operation  of  the 
referendum,  with  the  possibility,  in  fact,  almost  the  probability, 
that  the  question  which  is  asked  of  the  country  for  that  purpose 
will  be  couched  in  a  somewhat  extreme  form  —  are  you  quite  sure 
that  the  establishment  of  the  referendum  in  this  country  would 
make  for  moderate  legislation  —  if  that  is  what  you  desire  —  to  so 
great  an  extent  as  the  proposal  which  we  have  included  in  the 
Parliament  Bill  ? 

I  have  not  said  anything  yet  about  the  Preamble  of  the  Bill. 
Your  Lordships  are  very  familiar  with  the  phrase  so  often  spoken 
in  Committee  by  my  noble  friend  the  Lord  Chairman,  "  that  the 
Preamble  be  postponed."  That  is  what  I  have  done  in  these  few 
observations.  We  have  always  admitted  "  that  the  Preamble  be 
postponed"  is  also  our  policy.  But  the  postponement  of  the  ques- 
tion of  the  reform  of  the  House  of  Lords,  either  in  a  speech  or  as 
a  matter  of  policy,  does  not  mean,  and  cannot  mean,  that  we  are 
unmindful  of  that  aspect  of  the  subject.  There  are  more  reasons 
than  one  why  we  cannot  —  speaking  of  ourselves  as  a  Party  — 
neglect  this  question  of  the  reform  of  the  House  of  Lords.  When 
the  noble  Earl,  Lord  Selborne,  was  speaking  last  Thursday  he 
stated  —  though  whether  he  was  speaking  for  the  whole  of  the 
Party  opposite,  or  even  for  the  Front  Bench  I  am  not  certain  — 
that  the  Party  opposite  would  not  accept  this  measure,  and  that  if 
it  became  a  law,  and  they  came  into  power  later,  they  would  take 
the  first  opportunity  of  reversing  it.  That  is  to  say,  that  if  the  Bill 
passed  through  this  House  in  its  present  state,  any  scheme  of 
reform  which  noble  Lords  opposite  might  initiate  would  be  taken, 
as  I  understand,  as  an  excuse  for  adding  to  the  powers  of  the 
House  something  which  had  been  taken  away  from  it  by  this  Bill. 
If  that  is  so,  it  is  from  our  point  of  view  a  good  reason  for  our 
attempting  to  assist  in  the  work  of  reforming  the  House  while  we 
have  some  voice  in  the  matter,  because  in  the  other  event  I  am 


CURBING  THE  LORDS  483 

quite  sure  we  should  have  no  such  voice.  Then  again,  the  Bill  as 
it  stands  provides  a  further  reason  for  making  a  reform  of  your 
Lordships'  House  desirable.  We  do  not  want  to  rush  legislation 
through  Parliament.  We  know  very  well  that  any  attempt  so  to 
use  the  provisions  of  this  Bill  — -  even  if  they  could  be  so  used, 
which  I  greatly  doubt  —  would  only  recoil  upon  those  who  so 
attempted  to  use  them. 

As  I  have  said,  we  desire  to  substitute  delay  and  revision  for 
hurried  Party  rejection.  Delay  and  the  function  of  revision  mean 
that  you  desire  the  best  minds  that  you  can  find  to  be  applied  to 
that  revision.  The  theory  of  this  Bill  is  that  the  delay  and  the 
process  of  revision  will,  if  the  country  does  not  like  some  particular 
points  in  a  measure,  cause  such  pressure  to  be  put  upon  the  House 
of  Commons  that  at  its  next  consideration  the  measure  will  have 
to  be  modified ;  and  it  is  quite  evident  that  if  such  pressure  is  to 
be  brought  to  bear,  and  if  it  is  to  be  useful  pressure,  the  higher 
the  character,  the  more  brilliant  the  ability,  and  the  larger  the  ex- 
perience of  those  who  sit  in  the  Upper  House,  the  stronger  that 
pressure  will  be,  because  the  power  of  ultimate  and  final  rejection 
does  not  exist  if  this  Bill  becomes  law.  It  would  be  as  wrong  to 
say  that  the  character  of  the  Upper  House  in  these  circumstances 
was  no  longer  of  importance,  as  it  would  be  to  say  that  because 
a  Constitutional  Sovereign  is  not  an  absolute  despot,  therefore  his 
character  and  capacity  are  a  matter  of  no  importance. 

There  is  another  point.  Some  little  time  ago  Mr.  F.  E.  Smith 
—  one  of  the  most  brilliant,  though,  I  think,  at  times  inconvenient 
supporters  of  noble  Lords  opposite  —  stated  that  in  his  opinion 
the  measures  of  both  Parties  should  be  given  an  equal  chance  of 
becoming  law.  We  do  not  attempt  anything  so  ambitious.  Our  Bill 
falls  far  short  of  Mr.  Smith's  ideal.  Under  it  our  measures  will 
have  to  go  through  this  dragging  process  described  in  our  Bill, 
while  yours,  I  imagine,  will  go  through  on  the  india-rubber  tires  on 
which  they  have  always  passed  through  this  House.  I  quite  admit 
I  do  not  think  that  is  very  fair,  and  if  the  House  of  Lords  can  be 


484  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

so  reformed  as  to  afford  some  check,  I  do  not  say  as  complete  a 
check  as  this,  but  at  any  rate  some  check,  to  the  possible  extreme 
and  wild  legislation  which  may  be  proposed  by  noble  Lords  oppo- 
site and  their  friends,  and  if  that  can  be  brought  about  by  some 
reformation  of  the  constitution  of  the  House,  that  supplies  a  third 
reason  why  this  matter  of  reform  ought  not  to  escape  our  notice. 
We  still  maintain  the  proposal  for  quinquennial  Parliaments  —  that 
is  to  say,  it  is  practically  only  during  the  first  two  years  of  a  Par- 
liament, when  it  may  be  reasonably  supposed,  I  think,  to  possess 
the  confidence  of  the  country,  that  the  process  by  which  meas- 
ures can  be  made  law  during  the  lifetime  of  a  single  Parliament 
will  be  in  practical  operation. 

These  are  the  proposals  in  the  Bill.  They  have  been,  as  we  say, 
and  as  we  honestly  believe,  forced  upon  us  by  the  repeated  action 
of  your  Lordships'  House.  It  seems  to  us  as  if  your  Lordships 
had  of  late  years  learned  what  I  cannot  help  thinking  is  the  fatal 
lesson  —  that  it  is  worth  your  while  to  reject  our  measures  on  Party 
grounds  in  the  hope  that  before  they  can  come  up  again  something 
may  have  turned  up.  It  may  be  a  forced  election  —  perhaps  not 
altogether  a  very  popular  thing  in  itself.  It  may  be  a  cycle  of  bad 
trade  —  that  is  all  to  the  good.  It  may  be  a  wave  of  unemployment 
—  also  all  to  the  good.  Those  things,  as  we  all  know,  make  any 
Government  unpopular.  It  may  be  some  heavy  national  expendi- 
ture involving  new  taxation.  That  again  may  be  expected  to  make 
for  the  unpopularity  of  the  Government.  If  you  can  reject  our 
measures,  some  of  these  things  or  all  of  them  may  turn  up  and 
may  give  you  a  chance  that  our  Bills  should  not  become  law.  As 
I  say,  I  venture  to  think  that  that  is  a  disastrous  game  to  play.  It 
is  a  game  that  cannot  be  played  forever.  And,  admitting  as  you 
do  the  essential  unfairness  of  the  present  condition  —  because  it 
has  been  admitted  in  varying  degree  by  members  of  the  Party 
opposite  —  I  cannot  think  that  this  House  desires  to  go  on  playing 
it  indefinitely.  But  I  am  bound  to  say  that  among  the  reform 
proposals  which  have  been  brought  forward  from  the  other  side  of 


CURBING  THE  LORDS  485 

the  House  I  have  not  seen  an  indication  of  any  which,  so  far  as 
we  are  able  to  judge,  would  materially  alter  or  amend  this  state  of 
things.  Therefore,  in  asking  the  country  to  support  us  in  passing 
this  measure  we  have  to  ask  —  I  frankly  admit  it  — •  that  the  matter 
should  be  taken  out  of  your  hands  and  that  the  power  to  deal  with 
it  may  be  given  to  us.  I  only  beg  the  House  to  believe  that  we 
ask  this  in  no  factious  spirit  and  we  ask  it  with  no  desire  to  lay 
our  ancient  institutions  in  the  dust.  What  we  do  ask  the  country 
to  do  is  to  restore  a  reasonable  measure  of  freedom  to  the  chosen 
representatives  of  a  free  nation. 


Extj^act  y8 

OPPOSITION  TO  THE  PARLIAMENT  BILL 

[The  iMarqitess  of  La/isdow/w,  Lords ^  jVoi'ember  21,  igio) 

The  Marquess  of  Lansdownk  ^ :  .  .  .  I  wish  to  thank  the 
noble  Earl  for  having  made  a  speech  at  all  this  evening.  I  carry 
in  my  mind  a  memorable  occasion  on  which  he  moved  the  second 
reading  of  a  very  important  measure  by  a  slight  and  graceful  ges- 
ture of  hand  and  hat.  'J  o-night  he  has  been  more  indulgent  to  us 
and  has  given  us  a  speech  which  I  think  must  have  seemed  to 
most  of  your  Lordships  a  very  temperate  and  persuasive  speech. 
I  except,  perhaps,  one  or  two  sentences  in  his  peroration.  I  ven- 
ture to  say  that  if  we  were  now  commencing  a  long  discussion,  or 
a  long  series  of  Parliamentary  discussions,  upon  this  Bill,  the  speech 
of  the  noble  Earl  would  have  formed  an  invaluable  introduction 
or  preface  to  the  debate.  But  the  noble  Earl  forgot  that  he  has 
warned  us  off  anything  like  full  discussion  of  this  measure.  He  has 
forgotten  that  terse  phrase  in  which  he  told  us  that  the  Bill  would 
be  here  for  us  "  to  take  or  to  leave."  He  has  forgotten  the  intima- 
tion that  any  alternative  schemes  or  proposals  were  not  to  be 

1  Parliamentai-y  Debates,  Fifth  Series,  Lords,  vol.  6,  col.  7SS  sqq. 


486  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

regarded  as  in  order  for  the  purposes  of  this  discussion.  Well,  if 
that  is  so,  if  those  are  the  conditions  under  which  we  are  to  discuss 
the  Parliament  Bill,  are  we  greatly  assisted  by  the  noble  Earl's 
dissertations  upon  such  subjects  as  the  value  of  Conferences,  the 
possible  use  to  which  Joint  Sittings  might  be  put,  or  the  desira- 
bility of  having  recourse  to  the  referendum  ?  All  these  are  full 
of  interest  to  us,  but  when  are  we  going  to  be  allowed  to  talk 
about  them  ? 

We  are  face  to  face  not  only  with  the  announcements  of  the 
noble  Earl  himself  but  with  an  even  more  striking  and  memorable 
announcement  which  was  made  to  the  country  on  Saturday  last  by 
no  less  a  personage  than  the  Prime  Minister,  who  told  his  audience 
that  negotiations  were  at  an  end,  and  that  war  had  begun.  How 
then  are  we  to  deal  with  this  Bill  ?  It  is,  in  the  view  of  most  of  us 
on  this  side,  highly  open  to  criticism,  but  it  contains,  nevertheless, 
the  admission  of  two  or  three  principles  which  might  very  well  have 
formed  the  basis  of  discussion,  if  discussion  had  been  permitted 
—  I  mean  the  admission  that  it  is  necessary  to  find  some  machinery 
for  dealing  with  what  we  commonly  speak  of  as  deadlocks  between 
the  two  Houses  ;  the  admission,  which  is  to  be  found  in  the  Pre- 
amble, that  the  ultimate  settlement  of  these  great  Constitutional 
questions  implies  that  there  shall  be  a  reform  in  the  House  of  Lords; 
and  again,  the  claim  which,  within  reasonable  limits,  many  of  us  are 
inclined  to  admit,  that  the  other  House  of  Parliament  is  entitled  to 
a  preponderance  in  the  region  of  what  I  may  call  pure  finance. 
There  is  a  certain  amount  of  common  ground  at  these  points ; 
and  that  being  so,  I  am  under  the  impression  that  if  a  full  and 
free  discussion  of  this  Bill  had  really  been  open  to  us,  if  we  had 
been  promised  an  opportunity  of  amending  the  Bill  and  sending 
our  Amendments  down  to  the  House  of  Commons,  a  considerable 
number  of  your  Lordships  would  have  been  in  favour  of  giving 
the  measure  a  second  reading.  I  should,  I  say  frankly,  have  taken 
upon  myself  to  advise  those  who  might  care  to  know  what  my 
opinion  was  to  take  that  course.    The  Bill  would,  in  that  case,  have 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  487 

been  thoroughly  debated,  the  House  of  Commons  would  have  had 
its  opportunity  of  commenting  upon  the  changes  which  we  recom- 
mended, and  an  attempt  would  then,  no  doubt,  have  been  made  to 
arrive  at  an  understanding.  The  noble  Earl  very  likely  will  tell  me 
that  the  kind  of  course  which  I  had  in  mind  is  altogether  too  dila- 
tory for  himself  and  his  friends.  I  must  say  that  if  that  rejoinder 
is  made,  I  am  bound  to  ask  your  Lordships  whether  there  has  ever 
been  in  the  history  of  Parliament  a  case  of  a  Bill  of  the  kind  of 
importance  which  this  Bill  possesses  being  hurried  through  either 
House  of  Parliament  within  the  space  of  seven  days.  Our  debate, 
therefore,  must,  to  a  certain  extent,  be  an  unreal  debate,  and  our 
criticisms,  if  we  attempt  any,  must  be  in  a  sense  perfunctory  criti- 
cisms, and  all  that  we  can  do  within  the  time  at  our  disposal  is  to 
indicate  in  general  terms  the  points  to  which  we  attach  the  most 
importance. 

I  will  accordingly  venture  in  a  very  few  sentences  to  tell  the 
House  how  some  of  us  are  struck  by  the  main  provisions  of  the 
Bill.  I  take,  in  the  first  place,  the  clauses  dealing  with  the  question 
of  finance.  Now,  I  think  it  is  perfectly  obvious,  whatever  one's 
feelings  may  be  on  this  point,  that  the  scheme  of  the  Bill  is  an 
entirely  incomplete  and  badly  thought-out  scheme.  We  may  go 
far  in  the  direction  of  admitting  the  preponderance  of  the  House 
of  Commons,  where  the  legislation  is  purely  financial  legislation,  but 
we  are  all  of  us  quite  aware  that  there  are  many  Bills  which, 
although  nominally  financial  measures,  in  reality  are  directed  to 
purposes  quite  other  than  financial  purposes.  I  am  speaking,  of 
course,  not  only  of  that  which  is  known  in  the  text-books  as 
"tacking"  —  that  is  what  I  take  it  the  clause  in  the  Bill  is  aimed 
at ;  but  we  all  of  us  must  have  in  our  minds  the  case  of  other 
Bills  in  which  it  cannot  be  said  that  the  matter  complained  of  is, 
strictly  speaking,  foreign  to  the  purpose  of  the  Bill,  but  of  which  it 
can  be  said  with  perfect  truth  that  the  consequences  other  than  mere 
financial  consequences  of  the  Bill  entirely  outweigh  and  overtop  the 
purely  financial  results. 


488  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

I  find  in  this  Bill  in  the  first  place  what  seems  to  me  to  be  a 
very  inadequate  attempt  to  guard  against  tacking  in  the  stricter 
sense  of  the  word.  If  your  Lordships  will  look  at  the  end  of  the 
first  clause,  you  will  find  a  definition  of  a  Money  Bill  which  ends 
with  these  words,  "  Or  matters  incidental  to  those  subjects  or  any 
of  them."  That  is  a  loophole  through  which  any  provision,  however 
mischievous  and  dangerous,  could  easily  find  a  way.  Then  to  come 
to  the  other  kind  of  abuse  which  many  of  us  desire  to  guard  against. 
There  is  no  attempt,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  in  this  Bill  to  deal  at  all 
with  the  more  insidious  plan  of  presenting,  under  the  cloak  of  finance, 
measures  so  framed  as,  for  instance,  to  discriminate  unjustly  between 
one  set  of  persons  and  another  —  to  penalise  a  certain  trade,  a  cer- 
tain profession,  or  to  bring  about  great  social  or  political  changes. 
The  only  safeguard  I  find  against  tacking  of  any  kind  is  the  refer- 
ence of  the  point  to  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons. 
I  desire  to  express  my  concurrence  in  all  that  was  said  by  the 
noble  Earl  as  to  the  respect  due  to  that  high  official.  No  one  feels 
that  respect  more  than  I  do,  but  what  I  think  we  have  to  remem- 
ber is  that  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  is  an  official 
of  the  House  of  Commons.  He  is  not  in  a  judicial  position  as  one 
who  might  hold  the  balance  or  whose  business  it  was  to  hold  the 
balance  between  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament.  His  business  is 
to  watch  over  the  privilege  of  the  House  of  Commons  and  when- 
ever he  sees  what  seems  to  him  an  invasion  of  that  privilege  to 
stand  up  for  his  own  House.  If  it  had  been  possible  to  insert  in 
this  Bill  a  provision  which  would  really  effectually  safeguard  us,  not 
only  against  tacking  of  the  more  technical  kind,  which  I  attempted 
to  describe,  but  against  tacking  in  the  broader  sense,  I  for  one 
would  have  been  ready  to  suggest  that  your  Lordships  might  well 
forego  the  Constitutional  right  which  you  at  present  possess  to  deal 
with  Money  Bills  of  a  purely  financial  character.  The  concession 
would  obviously  be  a  considerable  one,  and  it  is  one  which  could 
not  be  for  a  moment  entertained  unless  the  kind  of  abuses  to 
which   I   have  referred  were  effectually  guarded  against. 


CURBING  THE  LORDS  489 

Then  may  I  say  one  word  as  to  the  clauses  dealing  not  with 
financial  but  with  ordinary  legislation  ?  They  seem  to  me  to  fall 
very  far  short  indeed  of  anything  that  is  due  to  a  self-respecting 
Second  Chamber  in  a  properly-balanced  Constitution.  All  that 
Clause  2  would  leave  to  the  House  of  Lords  is  an  opportunity  of 
interposing  comparatively  brief  delay  when  it  regarded  a  measure 
as  inexpedient  in  the  public  interest.  It  is  true  that  this  House 
would  be  given  the  right  of  three  rejections  in  two  years,  but  those 
rejections  would  take  place  with  the  knowledge  that  there  was  hang- 
ing over  us,  whatever  happened  in  the  third  year,  the  inexorable 
right  of  the  House  of  Commons  to  end  all  further  discussion  and 
to  pass  the  Bill  into  law  over  our  heads.  I  noticed  in  a  remarkable 
speech  delivered  by  the  Prime  Minister  on  Saturday  last  that  he 
apparently  attached  what  I  conceive  to  be  a  very  exaggerated  im- 
portance to  this  opportunity  of  delay  which  would  be  accorded  to  us. 
He  said,  "Where  the  two  Houses  differ  we  provide  for  such  oppor- 
tunities of  Conference  and  such  an  interposition  of  delay  as  would 
effectually  frustrate  any  attempt  by  a  scratch  majority  to  rush 
unpopular  legislation  out  of  touch  with  public  opinion."  I  confess 
that  when  I  read  that  statement  I  referred  to  my  copy  of  the  Bill, 
and  I  searched  it  in  vain  for  any  mention  of  the  word  Conference. 
But  I  have  no  doubt  the  Prime  Minister  had  in  his  mind  what 
was  said  by  the  noble  Earl  in  his  speech  just  now.  The  noble 
Earl  evidently  contemplates,  and  I  think  rightly  contemplates,  that 
there  would  be  more  frequent  and  more  regularised  resort  to  pro- 
cedure by  Conference,  and  if  that  is  his  view,  I  entirely  agree  with 
him,  and  agree  that  such  procedure  should  be  made  as  little  rigid 
and  difficult  as  possible. 

But,  my  Lords,  just  let  us  consider  for  a  moment  on  what  sort  of 
terms  of  equality  should  we  confer  with  the  other  House  of  Par- 
liament if  it  were  a  part  of  the  Constitution  that  supposing  our 
Conferences  came  to  nought  the  Bill  was  nevertheless  to  become  an 
act  over  our  heads.  The  noble  Earl  was  eloquent  upon  the  value 
of  delay.    He  said  that  nothing  was  more  alien  to  the  intentions 


490  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  his  colleagues  than  that  a  Bill  should  be  rushed  through  Par- 
liament, —  if  we  are  to  talk  of  rushing,  what  are  we  to  say  of 
this  Bill  being  rushed  through  before  Monday  next  ?  —  but  under 
the  Bill  a  measure  of  any  magnitude  might  be  sprung  upon  the 
country  and,  let  us  say,  in  the  second  or  third  year  of  a  Parlia- 
ment might  be  passed  into  law  by  the  sole  consent  of  the  House 
of  Commons.  I  wonder  whether  the  noble  Earl  can  point  to  any 
precedent  for  a  Second  Chamber  constituted  upon  these  lines  —  I 
mean  a  Second  Chamber  which  discharges  its  functions  upon  the 
understanding  that  not  only  the  Second  Chamber  itself  but  the  con- 
stituencies are  to  be  of  no  account  and  that  the  sole  power  is  to 
devolve  upon  the  popular  House  of  Parliament.  I  believe  that  you 
may  search  precedents  in  vain  for  any  arrangement  which  would 
thus  put  the  entire  control  over  public  affairs  in  the  hands  of  one 
House.  But  if  a  scheme  of  this  kind  is,  as  I  believe  it.  to  be, 
full  of  danger  when  you  are  dealing  with  ordinary  legislation,  what 
are  we  to  think  and  what  are  we  to  say  when  we  become  aware 
that  the  same  procedure  is  to  apply  even  to  what  I  should  call 
capital  legislation  —  I  mean  legislation  dealing  with  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  country,  dealing  with  such  questions  as  the  disestablish- 
ment of  the  Church  and  the  breaking  up  of  the  Union  between 
these  islands?  Do  not  let  us  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  this  dan- 
ger is  not  by  any  means  an  imaginary  one.  We  know  perfectly 
well,  and  the  noble  Earl  knows  perfectly  well,  how  we  stand  at 
this  moment  with  regard  to  the  question  of  Home  Rule  for  Ire- 
land. The  Prime  Minister  spoke  of  scratch  majorities.  He  has 
done  so  more  than  once  during  the  last  few  months,  and  perhaps 
not  unnaturally,  as  he  lives  and  has  his  being  under  a  sense  of  the 
inconvenience  which  may  be  experienced  from  a  scratch  majority. 
Let  me  read  another  sentence  spoken  by  Mr.  Asquith  early  in 
the  present  year.  He  said,  "There  were  conceivable  cases  where 
you  have  a  scratch  majority  combining  under  the  coercion  of  Party 
exigencies  for  a  particular  and  transient  purpose."  Have  we  not 
just  seen  an  announcement  by  the  head  of  one  of  the  groups  upon 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  491 

which  His  Majesty's  Government  depends  that  he  has  arrived  here 
from  America  with  a  large  sum  of  money  in  his  pocket  in  order  to 
take  advantage  of  Party  exigencies  and  the  difficulties  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  day  ?  I  ask  tlie  noble  Earl,  How  would  the  plan  of 
this  Bill  do  what  Mr.  Asquith  apparently  expects  it  to  do,  namely, 
frustrate  the  operation  of  a  combination  of  groups,  a  scratch  ma- 
jority, bent  upon  taking  advantage  of  the  necessities  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  day  for  a  transient  purpose  ?  One  other  word 
with  regard  to  this  portion  of  the  Bill.  The  whole  scheme  of  the 
Bill  is,  on  the  face  of  it,  an  interim  arrangement.  The  Preamble 
looks  forward  to  the  time  when  this  House  shall  be  differently 
constituted,  and  evidently  to  a  different  arrangement  in  regard  to 
deadlocks  when  that  time  shall  come.  I  find  in  this  Bill  no  indica- 
tion of  the  manner  in  which  we  are  eventually  to  pass  from  that 
interim  arrangement  to  aii  arrangement  of  a  more  permanent  and 
thoroughly  thought-out  character.  That  seems  to  me  to  be  a  defect 
to  which  attention  should  be  called. 

I  come  now  to  the  question  which  must  be  present  to  all  our 
thoughts.  Why  is  it  that  these  violent  things  are  to  be  done  ?  The 
noble  Earl  gave  us  at  the  beginning  of  his  speech  a  recapitulation 
of  what  he  regarded  as  the  facts  of  the  case.  He  went  back  four 
years  to  what  I  will  not  call  the  rejection  of  the  Education  Bill, 
but  to  our  inability  to  come  to  terms  over  the  Education  Bill,  and 
he  said  that  upon  that  occasion  the  House  of  Lords  was  going 
against  the  principles  which  had  been  clearly  expressed  by  the 
country  at  the  General  Election.  Was  that  quite  the  case  ?  What 
happened  when  His  Majesty's  Government  returned  to  the  charge 
and  resumed  their  attempt  to  legislate  on  the  subject  of  Education  ? 
Why,  the  whole  of  the  principles  which  were  supposed  to  have 
been  affirmed  by  the  country  at  the  General  Election  were  thrown 
overboard  by  His  Majesty's  Government.  You  had  a  Bill  con- 
nected with  the  name  of  Mr.  McKenna ;  you  had  another  Bill 
connected  with  the  name  of  Mr.  Runciman.  I  think  there  was  a 
fourth  Bill  which  was  under  informal  discussion  but  which  did  not 


492 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


see  the  light,  or,  at  any  rate,  did  not  come  to  this  House.  When 
the  noble  Earl  cites  these  subsequent  attempts  as  illustrations  of 
the  difificulties  interposed  by  the  House  of  Lords  in  the  way  of 
useful  legislation,  he  forgets  that  neither  the  McKenna  Bill  nor  the 
Runciman  Bill  ever  came  near  this  House.  All  that  those  two 
Bills  prove  is  that  His  Majesty's  Government  on  consideration 
thought  it  desirable  to  mend  their  own  hand  very  considerably. 
Then  I  come  to  the  Licensing  Bill,  which  I  need  not  discuss  at 
this  moment.  Assuming  that  we  threw  out  the  Licensing  Bill  and 
the  Education  Bill,  does  that  justify  the  statement  made  on  Satur- 
day by  the  Prime  Minister  that  in  almost  every  attempt  which  the 
House  of  Commons  made  to  give  effect  to  the  wishes  of  those 
who  elected  it,  it  was  systematically  thwarted,  baffled,  and  defeated 
by  the  House  of  Lords  ?  I  should  like  to  ask  the  noble  Earl  how 
many  Bills  which  the  people  have  really  shown  any  desire  to  get 
have  the  House  of  Lords  thrown  out,  and  how  many  Liberal 
measures  promoted  by  His  Majesty's  Government,  some  of  them 
very  far-reaching  measures  indeed,  have  passed  into  law,  not  only 
without  opposition  by  this  House,  but  with  all  the  assistance  we 
could  give  to  make  them  into  good  and  practicable  measures  ? 

The  Prime  Minister  is  usually  conspicuous  for  the  sobriety  of 
his  language.  On  this  occasion  it  seems  to  me  that  he  went  rather 
beyond  his  usual  tether,  and  it  is  perhaps  fortunate  that  upon  the 
particular  occasion  on  which  his  speech  was  delivered  the  noble 
Earl  opposite,  the  Minister  for  Agriculture,  was  also  present  in 
the  chair.  If  I  may  put  it  this  way,  I  would  say  that  if  the  Prime 
Minister  supplied  the  poison,  the  noble  Earl  immediately  supplied 
the  necessary  antidote.  I  have  read  the  Prime  Minister's  words. 
Now  I  will  read  the  noble  Earl's  words.  The  noble  Earl  explained 
that  the  policy  of  His  Majesty's  Government  was  what  he  called 
"a  policy  of  results,"  and  he  added  that  during  their  five  years 
they  had  had  peace  with  all  its  attendant  blessings,  loyalty  and 
contentment  in  South  Africa,  India  wisely  governed,  the  main- 
tenance of  a  magnificent  Navy,  the  creation  of  an  Army  —  he  did 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  493 

not  say  a  magnificent  Army ;  I  have  no  doubt  he  had  the  fear  of 
the  noble  and  gallant  Field-Marshal,  Lord  Roberts,  in  his  mind. 
And  then  the  noble  Earl  went  on  to  say  they  had  also  had  land 
reform,  labour  legislation,  old  age  pensions,  and  a  temperance  and 
people's  Budget.  And  now  pray  let  me  invite  the  attention  of  the 
House  particularly  to  the  climax :  "  Two  questions  remained  to 
be  solved.  Home  Rule  for  Ireland  and  the  Education  problem. 
Those  until  quite  lately  were  in  the  lap  of  the  Lords."  So  that 
this  famous  indictment  of  habitual  obstruction  is  whittled  down  by 
the  noble  Earl  to  two  measures  —  two  measures  in  five  years.  I 
would  venture  to  ask  him  whether  he  is  quite  sure  that  these  mat- 
ters are  in  the  lap  of  the  House  of  Lords.  I  do  not  quite  know 
whose  lap  the  Education  Bill  is  in  —  it  has  been  in  a  good  many 
different  laps  —  but  I  am  quite  sure  the  noble  Earl  knows,  or,  if 
he  does  not,  he  will  very  soon  find  out,  whose  lap  the  Home  Rule 
measure  lies  in. 

I  return  reluctantly  to  the  question  which  I  put  to  the  House  a 
few  moments  ago.  What  is  it  our  duty  to  do  with  this  Bill  ?  and  I 
come  to  this  conclusion,  that  all  we  can  do  is  to  avail  ourselves  of 
the  few  remaining  days,  I  might  almost  say  the  few  remaining 
hours,  which  are  left  to  us  in  order  to  endeavour  to  put  on  record, 
if  we  can,  in  a  simple  form  and  in  an  intelligible  shape,  the  pro- 
posals which  we  ourselves  would  be  inclined  to  lay  before  the 
country  for  the  settlement  of  this  part  of  the  question.  I  say  this 
part  of  the  question  because  I  regard  the  Resolutions  of  the  noble 
Earl  on  the  Cross  Benches  as  having  taken  us  as  far  as  we  can 
go  at  present  in  regard  to  the  question  of  the  constitution  of  the 
House  of  Lords.  I  thought  the  Prime  Minister,  in  the  same 
speech,  was  perhaps  unduly  severe  upon  my  noble  friend.  He 
said  my  noble  friend's  scheme  was  to  all  intents  and  purposes  a 
"  ghost,"  and  then,  by  a  rather  splendid  confusion  of  metaphors, 
he  said,  "  the  parricidal  pick-axes  "  were  already  at  work  on  the 
fabric  of  this  House.  I  do  not  know  how  one  could  operate  upon 
a  ghost  with  parricidal  pick-axes.    In  the  leading  ghost  case,  which 


494  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

is  to  be  found  in  Shakespeare's  '"  Hamlet,"  the  officer  in  command 
of  the  guard  proposed  to  attack  the  ghost  with  a  partisan,  whatever 
a  partisan  is,  but  I  suppose  it  must  be  something  different  from 
a  parricidal  pick-axe.  But  the  Prime  Minister  was  not  content  to 
leave  the  matter  there.  He  charged  my  noble  friend  and  your 
Lordships'  House  with  doing  what  he  called  applying  a  thin  coat 
of  democratic  varnish  to  the  "  ghost."  I  must  say  that  any  attempt 
to  varnish  a  ghost  would  require  a  considerable  amount  of  ingenuity. 
The  Resolutions  which,  before  our  proceedings  terminate  this 
evening,  I  shall  venture  to  lay  before  the  House  will,  then,  have 
reference  not  to  the  question  of  the  constitution  of  this  House,  but 
to  the  manner  in  which  deadlocks  between  the  two  Houses,  persistent 
differences  of  opinion,  might  be  dealt  with.  And  let  me  add  this 
observation.  We  on  this  side  have  always  been  in  favour  of  mak- 
ing some  change  in  our  procedure  for  the  purpose  of  meeting  that 
particular  difficulty.  I  say  that  because  the  noble  Earl  opposite 
told  us  the  other  evening  that  he  had  never  heard,  that  he  had  not 
the  faintest  idea,  that  that  was  a  part  of  the  case  we  were  inter- 
ested in.  I  looked  up  the  speech  which  I  delivered  in  this  House, 
I  think,  in  March  of  this  year,  and  I  find  I  then  stated  as  clearly 
as  I  possibly  could  that  in  our  view  both  questions  demanded  atten- 
tion —  on  the  one  hand,  the  constitution  of  this  House ;  on  the 
other,  the  procedure  to  be  resorted  to  in  case  of  differences  between 
the  two  Houses.  .  .  . 

Extract  yg 

GOVERNMENT   HASTE   AGAINST   THE   HOUSE   OF    LORDS 

[The  Earl  of  Rosebery,  Lo>-(fs,  iVove/nber  21,  iQio) 

The  Earl  of  Rosebery  ^ :  .  .  .  You  do  not  seem  to  realise 
what  you  are  doing.  You  bring  in  a  Bill  of  this  kind  with  the 
trivial  elegance  with  which  you  might  introduce  a  turnpike  Act  or 
the  mysterious  local  government  measures  which  are  moved  by  the 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  6,  col.  800  sqq. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  495 

dozen  by  some  lower  official  of  the  Government.  What  you  are 
attempting  to  do  is  none  of  these  things.  You  are  attempting  to  do 
away  with  one  estate  of  the  realm  without  substituting  anything  in 
its  place.  You  have  the  face  to  tell  us  that  we  are  acting  in  an  un- 
precedented manner  when  in  the  last  four,  five,  or  six  dying  days 
of  the  session  you  bring  forward  this  Motion  without  any  option 
to  us  but  to  say  Yes  or  No  to  any  of  the  provisions  of  the  Bill. 

The  noble  Marquess  behind  me  quoted  a  phrase  from  the  remark- 
able, I  might  almost  say  extraordinary,  speech  delivered  by  my 
right  hon.  friend  the  Prime  Minister  at  the  National  Liberal  Club 
on  Saturday.  I  make  every  allowance  for  the  exuberance  of  a 
speech  made  under  the  hospitable  auspices  of  the  National  Liberal 
Club,  where  I  have  so  often  enjoyed  myself  in  past  days.  But  I 
am  a  little  shocked  that  the  noble  Marquess  did  not  mark  the  most 
significant  part  of  that  speech,  which  was  accentuated  by  my  noble 
friend  who  spoke  last.  The  Prime  Minister  quoted  Dr.  Johnson 
as  saying  that  nothing  concentrates  a  man's  mind  so  much  as 
the  knowledge  that  he  is  going  to  be  hanged,  and  he  applied  the 
remark  to  your  Lordships'  House.  My  noble  friend  opposite  spoke 
of  a  deathbed  repentance.  This  is  the  spirit  apparently  in  which 
this  great  Government  approaches  this  vast  Constitutional  question. 
They  regard  the  House  of  Lords  as  simply  a  culprit  to  be  hanged 
without  shrift  and  without  repentance,  and  only  with  the  rather 
trite  consolations  of  my  noble  friend  opposite  to  cheer  its  last  hour. 
I  have  always  understood  that  when  a  man  is  going  to  be  hanged 
he  has,  besides  the  opportunity  of  concentration  of  mind,  some 
little  mercy  shown  to  him  in  the  disposal  of  his  last  moments.  He 
is  admitted  to  certain  indulgences.  My  noble  friends  opposite, 
having  put  on  the  black  cap,  are  not  inclined  to  any  such  leniency. 
We  claim  that  we  shall  employ  the  few  hours  which  we  have  to 
live  to  the  best  purpose  that,  in  our  judgment,  we  can,  and  we 
will  not  allow  any  other  necessities  to  override  that  which  dictates 
to  this  ancient  Assembly  the  right  to  present  its  own  case  to  the 
country  without  being  gagged  by  an  ultra-Liberal  Government. 


496  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  80 

FUTILITY  OF   REFORMING   THE  HOUSE  OF  LORDS 
FROM   WITHIN 

{Lord  Lorebiirti,  Lord  Cha/icel/or,  Lords,  A^ovember  21,  1910) 

Lord  Loreburn  ^ :  My  Lords,  the  question  before  your  Lord- 
ships' House  at  this  moment  is  that  this  debate  be  now  adjourned. 
I  will  only  say  a  very  few  words  on  what  I  call  the  fringe  which 
the  noble  Lord  added  to  the  point  under  discussion.  He  has 
spoken  of  our  precipitancy  and  desire  to  avoid  discussion.  Let  me 
remind  your  Lordships  what  is  the  history  of  the  question  of  the 
reform  of  the  House  of  Lords  and  the  adjustment  of  the  relations 
between  the  two  Houses. 

The  noble  Earl  has  been,  I  admit,  a  pioneer,  a  protagonist  in 
this  business  all  his  life.  He  dropped  it,  I  suppose,  as  an  impos- 
sible task  during  the  period  of  twenty  years  of  Conservative  ascend- 
ancy preceding  1905.  In  1905  when  a  Liberal  Government  came 
in  the  noble  Earl  took  no  step.  The  year  1906  passed.  In  1907 
Lord  Newton  brought  the  matter  forward  and  the  Committee  which 
was  appointed  reported  in  December,  1908.  Why  was  nothing 
said  about  all  these  proposals  for  reform  during  the  year  1909? 
Lord  Newton  put  down  a  motion  relating  to  the  subject,  but  only 
to  one  side  of  it,  —  namely,  the  constitution  of  the  House,  —  and  it 
constantly  disappeared  from  the  Paper.  It  seemed  always  to  vanish. 
If  I  were  not  aware  of  his  want  of  reverence  for  the  Whips,  I  should 
have  supposed  that  the  Whips  had  exercised  some  influence  upon 
him  not  to  bring  the  matter  forward  in  the  year  1909.  Your  Lord- 
ships will  remember  that  at  that  time  a  raid  was  contemplated  upon 
the  Budget,  and  that  might  not  be  a  convenient  time  to  draw  atten- 
tion to  the  supposed  shortcomings  of  your  Lordships'  House ;  you 
do  not  go  to  confessional  just  at  the  time  when  you  are  about  to 
stop  a  mail-coach.   .  .   . 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  6,  col.  8oi  sqq. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  497 

Extract  Si 

CONSERVATIVE  SUBSTITUTE  FOR  THE  PARLIAMENT  BILL 

{The  Marquess  of  Lansdowiie^  Lords ^  Nove7nber  2j^  ^9^o) 

The  Marquess  of  Lansdowne  ^  rose  to  move  — 

That  this  House  do  resolve  itself  into  Committee  in  order  to 
consider  the  following  resolutions  upon  the  relations  between  the 
two  Houses  of  Parliament : 

That  in  the  opinion  of  this  House  it  is  desirable  that  provision 
should  be  made  for  settling  differences  which  may  arise  between  the 
House  of  Commons  and  this  House,  reconstituted  and  reduced  in 
numbers  in  accordance  with  the  recent  Resolutions  of  this  House. 

That  as  to  Bills  other  than  Money  Bills,  such  provision  should 
be  upon  the  following  lines  : 

If  a  difference  arises  between  the  two  Houses  with  regard  to  any  Bill 
other  than  a  Money  Bill  in  two  successive  Sessions,  and  with  an  interval 
of  not  less  than  one  year,  and  such  difference  cannot  be  adjusted  by  any 
other  means,  it  shall  be  settled  in  a  Joint  Sitting  composed  of  members  of 
the  two  Houses. 

Provided  that  if  the  difference  relates  to  a  matter  which  is  of  great 
gravity,  and  has  not  been  adequately  submitted  for  the  judgment  of  the 
people,  it  shall  not  be  referred  to  the  Joint  Sitting,  but  shall  be  submitted 
for  decision  to  the  electors  by  Referendum. 

That  as  to  Money  Bills,  such  provision  should  be  upon  the 
following  lines : 

The  Lords  are  prepared  to  forego  their  constitutional  right  to  reject  or 
amend  Money  Bills  which  are  purely  financial  in  character. 

Provided  that  effectual  provision  is  made  against  tacking ;  and 

Provided  that,  if  any  question  arises  as  to  whether  a  Bill  or  any  pro- 
visions thereof  are  purely  financial  in  character,  that  question  be  referred 
to  a  Joint  Committee  of  both  Houses,  with  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Commons  as  Chairman,  who  shall  have  a  casting  vote  only. 

If  the  Committee  hold  that  the  Bill  or  provisions  in  question  are  not 
purely  financial  in  character,  they  shall  be  dealt  with  forthwith  in  a  Joint 
Sitting  of  the  two  Houses. 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  6,  col.  S3S. 


498  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  82 

SUPPORT  OF  THE   LANSDOWNE   RESOLUTIONS 

(Lord  Ribblesdale,  Lords,  November  2j,  1910) 

Lord  Ribblesdale^:  My  Lords,  I  think  I  shall  follow  the  advice 
of  my  noble  friend  below  me  and  not  make  a  dash  into  the  refer- 
endum, which  the  noble  Lord  [Ellenborough]  who  has  just  sat 
down  explained  to  us  much  more  clearly  than  I  have  ever  heard 
it  explained  before.  Neither  do  I  propose  to  follow  the  noble  Lord 
into  Lough  Swilly  or  the  deeply  indented  coast  of  Ireland  in  a 
gunboat  or  in  any  other  way.  What  he  said  about  our  being  sur- 
rounded by  Jacobins  and  Girondists  would  have  made  me  feel 
thoroughly  uncomfortable  were  it  not  for  the  extremely  pleasant 
smile  with  which  he  accompanied  this  disagreeable  piece  of  news. 

I  was  very  sorry  that  the  noble  Viscount,  Lord  Ridley,  towards 
the  end  of  his  interesting  speech,  when  he  got  to  closer  quarters 
with  the  Resolutions  before  us  to-night,  complained  of  suffering 
from  a  feeling  of  want  of  reality.  To  my  mind  these  Resolutions 
of  the  noble  Marquess  and  their  full  discussion  by  this  House  at 
the  present  moment  are  as  real  a  thing  on  as  real  an  issue  for  us 
all  in  this  country  as  we  have  had  before  us  since  the  Home  Rule 
Bill  of  1892  or  1893. 

Whatever  may  be  the  measure  of  consent,  or  quasi  consent,  or 
qualified  consent  on  the  two  sides  of  the  House,  I  think  we  may 
all  agree  that  we  are  getting  on  wonderfully  pleasantly  with  this 
debate.  It  is  evidently  possible,  as  Mr.  Carlyle  once  said,  to  agree 
very  tolerably  except  in  opinion.  I  do  not  suppose  that  the  two 
sides  of  the  House  to-night  are  agreed  in  opinion,  but  even  if  noble 
Lords  below  me  are  right  in  saying  that  it  is  quite  impossible  that 
this  great  Constitutional  difficulty  in  which  we  now  find  ourselves 
can  be  settled  by  consent,  it  is  quite  clear  that  in  this  House, 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Lords,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  6,  col.  S95  sqq. 


CURBINCx  THE   LORDS  499 

at  all  events,  the  matter  can  be  agreed  in  a  cordial  and  generous 
and  fair  spirit.  Now  on  Monday  night  I  thought  we  were  on  the 
verge  of  getting  a  little  cross.  I  know  that  I  suffered  myself  — 
and  my  noble  friend  below  me,  Earl  Beauchamp,  will  perhaps  cor- 
roborate it  —  from  two  or  three  spasms  of  noble  irritation.  But 
to-night  an  intelligent  foreigner  with  Virgil  at  his  fingers'  ends  and 
with  two  or  three  selected  tributes  of  the  noble  Lord,  Lord  Curzon, 
to  your  Lordships'  House  in  his  mind  as  well,  could  not  possibly 
say  Tantaene  animis  caelestibns  irae .?  as  he  might  have  done  on 
Monday  night. 

Now  I  proceed  to  the  Resolutions,  and  let  me  say  at  once  that 
not  only  do  I  welcome  them  and  thank  the  noble  Marquess  for 
putting  them  on  the  Paper  and  bringing  them  forward,  but,  speak- 
ing for  myself,  I  am  prepared  to  swallow  them  whole.  That,  no 
doubt,  sounds  a  hardy  and  indigestible  proceeding,  but,  after  all, 
I  am  taking  this  course  on  Lord  Crewe's  advice  to  us  to  do  the 
same  thing  with  the  Parliament  Bill,  which,  as  Lord  St.  Aldwyn 
and  Lord  Weardale  pointed  out  with  great  force,  has  not  even 
been  discussed  in  the  House  of  Commons  except  in  a  rudimentaiy 
way,  and  has  only  just  flitted  as  it  were  into  this  House,  but  the 
clauses  and  Preamble  of  which  are  the  Party  ticket  and  the  grounds 
for  the  General  Election  upon  which  the  country  is  to  be  fought. 
When  I  say  that  I  am  prepared  to  swallow  the  Resolutions  whole, 
I  think  it  is  also  right  to  say  that  as  regards  the  Government  Bill 
I  must  admit  myself  to  have  become  rather  a  waverer.  Whatever 
the  Conference  did,  it  gave  us  considerable  time  for  reflection,  and 
I  became  so  convinced  that  we  should  have  to  find  some  sort  of 
constitutional  adjustment  of  the  relations  of  the  two  Houses  that, 
speaking  for  myself,  I  was  prepared  to  go  a  very  long  way  for  the 
sake  of  a  settlement  by  consent  towards  the  Government  Bill. 
But  I  am  bound  to  say  that  holding  those  views,  I  greatly  prefer 
the  Resolutions  which  the  noble  Marquess  has  put  upon  the  Paper, 
and  I  prefer  them  for  this  reason  :  I  feel  that  these  Resolutions 
are  altogether  a  more  decorous  and  proper  approach  towards  the 


500  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

solution  of  this  great  Constitutional  question,  and  I  prefer  them 
very  much  to  the  Parliament  Bill  for  the  further  reason  that  they 
are  not  stamped  with  the  hall-mark,  as  that  Bill  is,  of  a  particular 
majority  in  this  particular  Parliament  and  in  particular  relation  to 
the  Irish  vote  and  the  Irish  demand. 

I  feel  now  that  I  should  like  to  put  myself  right  with  the  noble 
Earl  who  sits  on  the  Cross  Benches  [Lord  Rosebery]  and  perhaps 
with  the  House  for  the  line  I  took  the  other  night  when  Lord 
Rosebery's  Resolutions  were  discussed  and  when  he  said  that  I 
had  not  made  it  clear  to  him  what  I  meant.  I  should  be  sorry  to 
think  that  I  had  in  any  way  taken  a  wayward  or  an  ungracious 
line  that  evening  —  wayward  in  the  sense  of  being  out  of  harmony 
with  the  self-denying  ordinance  which  we  have  all  affirmed  by  pass- 
ing these  Reform  Resolutions.  My  mind  has  been  much  concen- 
trated upon  the  present  difficulties  in  which  we  find  ourselves,  and 
I  have  felt  all  along  that  the  immediate  crux  of  the  situation  did 
not  lie  in  domestic  reform  from  within,  but  in  presenting  to  the 
electorate  alternative  proposals  which  would  bring  about  a  Con- 
stitutional readjustment.  It  seemed  to  me  that  in  the  very  short 
time  at  our  disposal,  owing  to  what  I  can  only  call  this  electioneer- 
ing General  Election,  this  could  only  be  done  by  giving  a  second 
reading  to  the  Parliament  Bill  and  going  into  Committee.  But 
now  that  these  Resolutions  have  been  put  forward  I  cjuite  admit 
I  was  wrong.  I  did  not  know  at  the  time  that  the  Resolutions 
were  coming  forward,  and  I  was  nervous  lest  in  our  passion  for 
self-reform  from  within  we  should  do  anything  which  should  jeop- 
ardise our  time  and  our  chance  of  getting  alternative  proposals,  by 
way  of  arriving  at  some  agreement  by  consent,  put  fully  before 
the  constituencies  before  the  28th,  when  the  Dissolution  has  been 
fixed.  .   .   . 

Speaking  for  myself,  I  am  not,  I  am  afraid,  a  very  ardent  re- 
former. I  have  no  desire  to  strike  any  doleful  note,  or  to  sing  any 
sort  of  Swan  Song.  I  hope  we  are  a  long  way  off  from  that  yet. 
The  Resolutions  which  were  passed  the  other  night  must  inevitably 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  501 

have  very  great  effect.  Here  again  I  make  my  arnende  to  the 
noble  Earl,  Lord  Rosebery,  for  if  he  had  not  gone  on  with  them, 
those  Resolutions  could  not  have  been  grafted  on  to  the  Resolu- 
tions which  the  noble  Marquess  has  now  moved,  thus  providing 
for  a  reformed  Second  Chamber.  It  is  quite  clear  that  under  these 
Resolutions,  as  Lord  Newton  said  the  other  night,  a  large  number  of 
us  will  have  to  go,  and  personally  I  shall  miss  a  great  many  things 
which  I  associate  with  the  House  of  Lords  and  of  which  I  have 
become  fond.  I  do  not  want  to  be  sentimental,  but  I  shall  miss 
the  stationery,  the  quill  pens,  and  even  the  superlative  coal  fires 
and  draughts  of  your  Lordships'  House.  I  have  been  here  all  my 
life,  but  whether  or  not  it  is  due  to  some  inherited  aptitude,  I  have 
intuitions  about  the  House  of  Commons  which  make  me  put  all 
these  personal  feelings  on  one  side  and  desire  above  all  things  to 
secure  a  settlement  of  this  question.  I  do  not  know  that  the 
Resolutions  can  effect  that,  but  I  believe,  as  one  or  two  speakers 
have  said  this  evening  and  as  even  the  noble  Earl,  Lord  Crewe, 
said,  they  do  provide  a  basis  for  settlement  by  consent  which  I  do 
not  believe  any  Government  or  any  constituency  will  altogether 
put  aside. 

The  Resolutions  of  the  noble  Marquess  seem  to  me  to  have  this 
very  considerable  advantage  over  the  Parliament  Bill,  even  the 
Parliament  Bill  taken  at  its  very  best,  that  they  do  not  lay  us  open 
now,  —  thanks,  as  I  have  just  said,  to  Lord  Rosebery  for  having 
stuck  to  his  Resolutions,  —  they  do  not  lay  us  open  to  the  charge 
or  to  the  actuality  of  a  Single-Chamber  Government,  whereas, 
whatever  the  result  may  be  in  practice,  there  is  no  sort  of  doubt 
that  the  Government  proposals  are  logically  open  to  the  charge 
not  of  adjusting  Constitutional  relations  but  of  substituting  till  such 
good  time  as  in  the  Government  view  may  best  suit  them  a  Single- 
Chamber  for  a  Double-Chamber  Government.  Under  these  circum- 
stances the  noble  Marquess  and  his  friends  will  have  my  hearty 
support  in  these  Resolutions. 


502  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Extract  8j 

PARLIAMENT  ACT,   1911 

{I  &r-  2  Geo.  J,  ch.  ij) 

An  Act  to  make  provision  with  respect  to  the  powers  of  the  House 
of  Lords  in  relation  to  those  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and 
to  limit  the  duration  of  Parliament.       (i8th  August  191 1) 

Whereas  it  is  expedient  that  provision  should  be  made  for  regu- 
lating the  relations  between  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament : 

And  whereas  it  is  intended  to  substitute  for  the  House  of  Lords 
as  it  at  present  exists  a  Second  Chamber  constituted  on  a  popular 
instead  of  hereditary  basis,  but  such  substitution  cannot  be  imme- 
diately brought  into  operation  : 

And  whereas  provision  will  require  hereafter  to  be  made  by 
Parliament  in  a  measure  effecting  such  substitution  for  limiting 
and  defining  the  powers  of  the  new  Second  Chamber,  but  it  is 
expedient  to  make  such  provision  as  in  this  Act  appears  for  re- 
stricting the  existing  powers  of  the  House  of  Lords : 

Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty, 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lords  Spiritual  and 
Temporal,  and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled, 
and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 

I.  Po7ver  of  House  of  Lords  as  to  Money  Bills 

(i)  If  a  Money  Bill,  having  been  passed  by  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, and  sent  up  to  the  House  of  Lords  at  least  one  month 
before  the  end  of  the  session,  is  not  passed  by  the  House  of  Lords 
without  amendment  within  one  month  after  it  is  so  sent  up  to  that 
House,  the  Bill  shall,  unless  the  House  of  Commons  direct  to  the 
contrary,  be  presented  to  His  Majesty  and  become  an  Act  of  Parlia- 
ment on  the  Royal  Assent  being  signified,  notwithstanding  that  the 
House  of  Lords  have  not  consented  to  the  Bill. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  503 

(2)  A  Money  Bill  means  a  Public  Bill  which  in  the  opinion  of  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  contains  only  provisions  dealing 
with  all  or  any  of  the  following  subjects,  namely,  the  imposition, 
repeal,  remission,  alteration,  or  regulation  of  taxation ;.  the  imposition 
for  the  payment  of  debt  or  other  financial  purposes  of  charges  on 
the  Consolidated  Fund,  or  on  money  provided  by  Parliament,  or  the 
variation  or  repeal  of  any  such  charges  ;  supply  ;  the  appropriation, 
receipt,  custody,  issue  or  audit  of  accounts  of  public  money ;  the 
raising  or  guarantee  of  any  loan  or  the  repayment  thereof ;  or  sub- 
ordinate matters  incidental  to  those  subjects  or  any  of  them.  In 
this  subsection  the  expressions  "  taxation,"  "  public  money,"  and 
"  loan  "  respectively  do  not  include  any  taxation,  money,  or  loan 
raised  by  local  authorities  or  bodies  for  local  purposes. 

(3)  There  shall  be  endorsed  on  every  Money  Bill  when  it  is 
sent  up  to  the  House  of  Lords  and  when  it  is  presented  to  His 
Majesty  for  assent  the  certificate  of  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Commons  signed  by  him  that  it  is  a  Money  Bill.  Before  giving 
his  certificate,  the  Speaker  shall  consult,  if  practicable,  two  mem- 
bers to  be  appointed  from  the  Chairmen's  Panel  at  the  beginning 
of  each  Session  by  the  Committee  of  Selection. 

2.  Restriction  of  Powers  of  House  of  Lords  as  to  Bills 
other  than  Money  Bills 

(i)  If  any  Public  Bill  (other  than  a  Money  Bill  or  a  Bill  contain- 
ing any  provision  to  extend  the  maximum  duration  of  Parliament 
beyond  five  years)  is  passed  by  the  House  of  Commons  in  three 
successive  sessions  (whether  of  the  same  Parliament  or  not),  and, 
having  been  sent  up  to  the  House  of  Lords  at  least  one  month 
before  the  end  of  the  session,  is  rejected  by  the  House  of  Lords  in 
each  of  those  sessions,  that  Bill  shall,  on  its  rejection  for  the  third 
time  by  the  House  of  Lords,  unless  the  House  of  Commons  direct 
to  the  contrary,  be  presented  to  His  Majesty  and  become  an  Act  of 
Parliament  on  the  Royal  Assent  being  signified  thereto,  notwith- 
standing: that  the  House  of  Lords  have  not  consented  to  the  Bill : 


504  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Provided  that  this  provision  shall  not  take  effect  unless  two  years 
have  elapsed  between  the  date  of  the  second  reading  in  the  first  of 
those  sessions  of  the  Bill  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  the  date  on 
which  it  passes  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  third  of  those  sessions. 

(2)  When  a  Bill  is  presented  to  His  Majesty  for  assent  in  pur- 
suance of  the  provisions  of  this  section,  there  shall  be  endorsed  on 
the  Bill  the  certificate  of  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons 
signed  by  him  that  the  provisions  of  this  section  have  been  duly 
complied  with. 

(3)  A  Bill  shall  be  deemed  to  be  rejected  by  the  House  of  Lords 
if  it  is  not  passed  by  the  House  of  Lords  either  without  amendment 
or  with  such  amendments  only  as  may  be  agreed  to  by  both  Houses. 

(4)  A  Bill  shall  be  deemed  to  be  the  same  Bill  as  a  former  Bill 
sent  up  to  the  House  of  Lords  in  the  preceding  session  if,  when 
it  is  sent  up  to  the  House  of  Lords,  it  is  identical  with  the  former 
Bill  or  contains  only  such  alterations  as  are  certified  by  the  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Commons  to  be  necessary  owing  to  the  time  which 
has  elapsed  since  the  date  of  the  former  Bill,  or  to  represent  any 
amendments  which  have  been  made  by  the  House  of  Lords  in  the 
former  Bill  in  the  preceding  session,  and  any  amendments  which 
are  certified  by  the  Speaker  to  have  been  made  by  the  House  of 
Lords  in  the  third  session  and  agreed  to  by  the  House  of  Commons 
shall  be  inserted  in  the  Bill  as  presented  for  Royal  Assent  in  pur- 
suance of  this  section : 

Provided  that  the  House  of  Commons  may,  if  they  think  fit,  on 
the  passage  of  such  a  Bill  through  the  House  in  the  second  or  third 
session,  suggest  any  further  amendments  without  inserting  the 
amendments  in  the  Bill,  and  any  such  suggested  amendments  shall 
be  considered  by  the  House  of  Lords,  and,  if  agreed  to  by  that 
House,  shall  be  treated  as  amendments  made  by  the  House  of 
Lords  and  agreed  to  by  the  House  of  Commons  ;  but  the  exercise 
of  this  power  by  the  House  of  Commons  shall  not  affect  the  oper- 
ation of  this  section  in  the  event  of  the  Bill  being  rejected  by  the 
House  of  Lords. 


CURBING  THE   LORDS  505 

J.    Certificate  of  Speaker 

Any  certificate  of  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  given 
under  this  Act  shall  be  conclusive  for  all  purposes,  and  shall  not  be 
questioned  in  any  court  of  law. 

4.  Enacting  Words 

(i)  In  every  Bill  presented  to  His  Majesty  under  the  preceding 
provisions  of  this  Act,  the  words  of  enactment  shall  be  as  follows, 
that  is  to  say  : 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty,  by  and  with  the 
advice  and  consent  of  the  Commons  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled, 
in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Parliament  Act,  191 1,  and  by 
authority  of  the  same,  as  follows. 

(2)  Any  alteration  of  a  Bill  necessaiy  to  give  effect  to  this  sec- 
tion shall  not  be  deemed  to  be  an  amendment  of  the  Bill. 

J".  Provisional  Order  Bills  Excluded 

In  this  Act  the  expression  "  Public  Pjill  "  does  not  include  any 
Bill  for  confirming  a  Provisional  Order. 

6.  Saving  Clause 

Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  diminish  or  qualify  the  existing  rights 
and  privileges  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

7.   Duration  of  Parliament 

Five  years  shall  be  substituted  for  seven  years  as  the  time  fixed 
for  the  maximum  duration  of  Parliament  under  the  Septennial  Act, 

1715-' 

8.   Title 

This  Act  may  be  cited  as  the  Parliament  Act,  191 1. 

1  I  Geo.  I,  Stat.  2,  ch.  38. 


CHAPTER  X 

NATIONAL  INSURANCE 

[Since  the  Liberal  Government  came  into  power  in  1906,  they 
had  promoted,  as  has  been  seen,  a  large  number  of  social  reforms, 
such  as  the  protection  of  the  legal  rights  of  labourers  and  trade 
unions,  assurance  of  child  welfare,  regulation  of  sweated  labour, 
establishment  of  labour  exchanges,  old  age  pensions,  housing  and 
town  planning  schemes  and  almost  revolutionary  tax  arrangements. 
Their  efforts,  interrupted  and  possibly  imperilled  for  a  while  in  19 10 
on  account  of  the  two  General  Elections  and  the  accompanying 
struggle  to  reduce  the  political  power  of  the  House  of  Lords,  were 
put  forth  again  in  191 1  to  secure  the  passage  of  what  is  perhaps 
the  most  important  measure  of  social  betterment  ever  introduced 
in  the  British  Parliament  —  "an  Act  to  provide  for  insurance  against 
loss  of  life  and  for  the  prevention  and  cure  of  sickness  and  for 
insurance  against  unemployment." 

In  the  German  Empire,  a  system  of  national  compulsory  insur- 
ance of  workingmen  against  sickness  and  unemployment  had  been 
in  successful  operation  for  many  years,  but  despite  considerable 
agitation  and  many  promises,  similar  action  in  Great  Britain  had 
been  long  delayed.  However,  in  the  course  of  the  debate  in  1906 
on  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Bill,  .several  speakers,  notably 
Sir  Charles  Dilke,^  urged  the  fundamental  character  of  such  an  in- 
surance. Again,  the  discussion  on  old  age  pensions  served  in  the 
main  to  support  the  contention  that  insurance  was  a  natural  corol- 
lary to  pensions.^  And  in  outlining  the  Government's  plans  for 
the   establishment   of    labour   exchanges,    Mr.   Winston   Churchill 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  3S.  2  cf.  supra,  p.  142. 

506 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE 


507 


declared  ^  that  that  would  constitute  a  beginning  in  the  preparation 
and  perfecting  of  a  program  for  general  state  insurance. 

From  1908  to  191 1  various  officials  and  committees  of  Govern- 
ment departments  worked  on  the  problem,  which  proved  most 
knotty  and  intricate.  At  length,  on  May  4,  191 1,  Mr.  David 
"tteyd—George,  as  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  brougRT  in  tHe 
Bill,  containing  eighty-seven  clauses  and  nine  schedules ;  and,  in 
a  remarkably  clear  speech  (^Extract  84),  sketched  its  purpose  and 

The  Chancellor's  appeal  was  well 


explained  its  chief  provisions, 
received  by  the  leaders  of  the  other  parties.  Mr.  Austen  Cham- 
berlain, of  the  Opposition,  would  have  preferred  to  deal  separately 
with  insurance  against  sickness  and  that  against  unemployment,  but 
expressed  general  sympathy  with  the  objects.  Mr.  John  Redmond, 
leader  of  the  Irish  Nationalists,  assured  the  Government  of  his 


support  (^Extract  Sj) ;  and  the  Labour  Members,  while  express- 
ing~^OTne''tear  as  to  the  details  of  the  measure,  were  naturally 
favourable. 

The  Bill  came  up  for  second  reading  in  the  Commons  on  May  24. 
It  had  been  much  discussed  in  the  interval,  and  the  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer  had  invited  and  encouraged  criticisms.  Though  the 
general  public  reception  appeared  favourable,  misgivings  were 
expressed  by  some  employers  and  some  representatives  or~die 
friendIy7or  benefit,  societies.   The  most  active  criticism  came  from 


the  medical  profession  and  its  organisation.  They  held  that  they 
would  lose  practice  among  the  lower  middle  and  artisan  classes, 
and  that  the  fees  fixed  by  the  Bill  for  medical  attendance  upon  the 
insured  were  altogether  too  low.  Mr.  Sydney  Buxton,  President 
of  the  Board  of  Trade,  in  moving  second  reading,  explained  the 
general  principles  of  the  Bill  and  answered  several  criticisms  (^.v- 
fn7cf  86).  Speaking  for  the  official  Opposition,  Mr.  H.  W.  Forster 
complained  about  the  coupling  of  sickness  and  unemployment  in 
one  measure,  the  creation  of  a  debt  of  ^63,000,000  to  start  the 
scheme,  the  increased  contribution  from  employers  where  wages 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  200. 


5o8  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

were  low,  and  the  possible  effect  upon  the  doctors  and  friendly 
societies ;  the  Opposition  hoped,  however,  that  the  second  reading 
would  be  passed  without  a  single  dissentient  vote.  The  National- 
ists and  the  Labour  party  again  welcomed  the  Bill,  though  with 
considerable  reserve  as  to  certain  points.  After  a  number  of  other 
speeches,  Mr.  Rufus  Isaacs,  the  Attorney-General,  cited  several 
important  lessons  that  might  be  drawn  from  German  experience 
along  similar  lines  {Extract  Sy). 

In  the  course  of  the  debate  on  second  reading,  Mr.  Ramsay 
Macdonald,  the  leader  of  the  Labour  party,  pointed  out  that  the 
Insurance  Bill  marked  a  fundamental  change  in  public  opinion, 
both  larger  parties  now  accepting  the  principle  that  social  welfare 
was  the  care  of  the  state  —  social  affairs  the  main  business  of 
politics  {Extract  88).  His  criticisms  suggested  the  desire  of  his 
party  for  alternative  provisions  to  certain  ones  in  the  Govern- 
ment Bill. 

Committee  stage  was  begun  on  July  5  and  continued  intermit- 
tently into  November.  Several  hundreds  of  amendments  were 
adopted,  the  chief  of  which  may  be  roughly  outlined  as  follows :  ^ 
Sick  pay  (los.  per  week  for  men,  7  s.  6d.  for  women)  was  to  con- 
tinue for  twenty-six  weeks  instead  of  thirteen.  Maternity  benefit 
was  extended  to  the  wife  of  an  insured  person  even  if  she  herself 
was  an  insured  person.  Sanatorium  for  consumption  might  be 
extended  to  the  dependants  of  the  insured  consumptive.  Married 
women  might  now  come  in  during  their  husband's  lifetime  as  vol- 
untary contributors  with  reduced  payments,  receiving  sickness  and 
disablement  benefit.  Soldiers,  sailors  and  other  naval  men,  and 
mercantile  seamen,  might  come  in  under  special  provisions;  so 
might  fishermen  co-partners  under  regulations  to  be  made  by  the 
Commissioners  according  to  varying  local  customs.  Where  it  was 
the  custom  for  the  employer  to  pay  full  wages  during  sickness  the 
contributions  of  both  employers  and  employed  might  be  reduced 

1  Cf.  The  Annual  Register,  191 1,  p.  2S1.  The  same  volume  gives,  in  various 
places,  details  of  the  debate,  whose  incorporation  in  this  work  space  precludes. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  509 

and  the  sickness  benefit  likewise  if  tlie  employer  would  agree  to 
pay  wages  for  six  weeks  of  illness.  Persons  earning  less  than  9s. 
a  week  paid  no  contribution,  those  between  9s.  and  12s.,  id.  per 
week  less  than  under  the  original  Bill.  The  local  Health  Commit- 
tees were  to  be  called  Insurance  Committees,  and  their  numbers 
and  powers  had  been  considerably  increased.  The  "  Post  Office  " 
part  of  the  Bill  was  made  distinctly  provisional.  'Inhere  were  to  be 
separate  Commissioners  for  Ireland,  Scotland,  and  Wales.  The 
provisions  for  Ireland  were  considerably  altered ;  inter  alia  the 
employer's  contribution  was  reduced  to  2-^d.  a  week ;  migratory 
labourers  and  outworkers  whose  work  was  done  in  leisure  time 
were  exempted,  medical  benefit  was  withdrawn  in  view  of  the  ex- 
istence of  the  dispensary  system  and  the  constitution  of  Health 
Committees  adapted  to  Irish  conditions.  Part  II  (Unemployment) 
was  but  little  altered  in  the  Standing  Committee.  The  weekly 
benefits  in  the  building  trades  were  raised  to  7  s.,  the  minimum 
age  reduced  from  eighteen  to  sixteen,  with  reduced  contributions 
and  benefits  below  eighteen ;  apprentices  were  exempted ;  an  em- 
ployer giving  regular  employment  would  be  rewarded  by  rebates, 
not  by  a  reduction  of  contributions  ;  and  employers  were  prohibited 
from  deducting  their  own  contribution  from  wages. 

On  December  6  the  Bill  reached  third  reading  in  the  House  of 
Commons.  In  the  meanwhile,  protests  against  it  had  been  multi- 
plying from  the  medical  profession,  representatives  of  hospitals, 
and  clerks  ;  the  General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions  had  protested 
against  the  severance  of  the  four  kingdoms ;  and  many  domestic 
servants  had  been  organised  by  their  employers  to  resist  the  pro- 
visions which  affected  their  relations.  It  was  rumoured  that  the 
Conservatives  would  utilise  this  agitation  in  order  to  oppose  a 
measure  which  at  heart  very  few  of  them  really  favoured,  despite 
the  support  that  they  had  promised  on  first  and  second  readings. 

At  any  rate,  the  Opposition  met  the  motion  for  the  third  reading 
with  an  amendment  to  the  effect  that,  under  the  part  dealing  with 
health  insurance,  public  and  individual  contributions  would  not  be 


5IO  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

used  to  the  best  advantage,  that  the  discussion  and  explanation  of 
the  Bill  had  been  defective,  and  that  its  operation  would  be  un- 
equal, and  that  it  should  therefore  be  again  considered  in  19 12, 
draft  regulations  for  its  operation  being  published  meanwhile.  This 
was  moved  by  Mr.  H.  W.  Forster,  who  disclaimed  any  intention 
of  wrecking  the  measure.  His  speech  (^Extract  8g)  explained  the 
changed  attitude  of  the  Conservatives. 

Mr.  Ramsay  Macdonald,  re-entering  the  debate,  said  that  mis- 
givings were  certainly  widespread,  but  that  the  choice  was  between 
partly  satisfactory  legislation  and  none  at  all.  Mr.  Lloyd  George 
bitterly  assailed  the  Conservative  position.  Postponement,  he  stated, 
would  upset  the  business  of  the  friendly  societies  and  insurance 
companies  and  reopen  unfortunate  controversies ;  and  he  espe- 
cially assailed  Lord  Robert  Cecil,  who  replied  with  his  usual  plea 
in  behalf  of  individualism  {Extract  go). 

Mr.  Bonar  Law,  the  new  Leader  of  the  Opposition,  closed  the 
debate  for  his  party,  insisting  that  the  amendment  did  not  neces- 
sarily mean  the  rejection  of  the  Bill  and  reviewing  the  main 
Conservative  objections  (^Extract  gi).  Mr.  Asquith  replied  in  an 
eloquent  speech  (Extract  g2).  The  amendment  was  defeated  by 
320  to  223,  and  the  third  reading  carried  by  324  to  21.  Li  the 
first  division  two  LTnionists  voted  with  the  Government,  seven 
Independent  Nationalists  with  the  Opposition ;  the  minority  in 
the  second  division  comprised  three  Labour  members,  the  seven 
Independent  Nationalists,  and  eleven  Unionists. 

The  progress  of  the  Bill  through  the  House  of  Lords- was  un- 
eventful, and  it  received  the  royal  assent  on  December  16,  igii. 
The  extraordinary  length  of  the  National  Insurance  Act  (i  &  2 
Geo.  5,  ch.  55)  —  it  covers  one  hundred  and  fifteen  pages  of  the 
Statute  Book  —  prevents  its  inclusion  in  this  volume.^ 

1  An  excellent  edition  of  the  full  act,  together  with  explanatory  notes,  tables,  and 
examples,  is  that  of  Orme  Clark,  with  an  introduction  by  Sir  John  Simon,  Solicitor- 
General  (1912).  For  analyses  and  explanations,  cf.  L.  G.  Chiozza  Money,  A  Nation 
Insured  (1912)  ;  Carr  and  Taylor,  National  Insurance  (1912)  ;  and  E.  Porritt,  "The 
British  National  Insurance  Act,"  in  Political  Science  Quarterly,  June,  1912. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  511 

Extract  84 

EXPOSITION   OF  THE   NATIONAL  INSURANCE   BILL 

[Mr.  David  Lloyd  George^  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer 
Covimoiis^  May  4,  iQn) 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  ^ :  .  .  .  I  think  it  must  be  a  relief  to  the 
Members  of  the  House  of  Commons  to  turn  from  controversial 
questions  for  a  moment  to  a  question  which,  at  any  rate,  has  never 
been  the  subject  of  controversy  between  the  parties  in  the  State. 
I  believe  there  is  a  general  agreement  as  to  the  evil  which  has  to 
be  remedied.  There  is  a  general  agreement  as  to  its  urgency,  and 
I  think  I  can  go  beyond  that  and  say  there  is  a  general  agree- 
ment as  to  the '  main  proposals  upon  which  the  remedy  ought  to 
be  based. 

In  this  country  ...  30  per  cent  of  the  pauperism  is  attributable 
to  sickness.  A  considerable  percentage  would  probably  have  to  be 
added  to  that  for  unemployment.  The  administration  of  the  Old 
Age  Pensions  Act  has  revealed  the  fact  that  there  is  a  mass  of 
poverty  and  destitution  in  this  country  which  is  too  proud  to  wear 
the  badge  of  pauperism  and  which  declines  to  pin  that  badge  to 
its  children.  They  would  rather  suffer  from  deprivation  than  do 
so.  I  am  perfectly  certain  if  this  is  the  fact  with  regard  to  persons 
of  seventy  years  of  age,  there  must  be  a  multitude  of  people  of 
that  kind  before  they  reach  that  age. 

The  efforts  made  by  the  working  classes  to  insure  against  the 
troubles  of  life  indicate  they  are  fully  alive  to  the  need  of  some 
provision  being  made.  There  are  three  contingencies  against  which 
they  insure  —  death,  sickness,  and  unemployment.  Taking  them  in 
the  order  of  urgency  which  the  working  classes  attach  to  them, 
death  would  come  first.  There  are  42,000,000  industrial  policies 
of  insurance  against  death  issued  in  this  country  of  small  amounts 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  25,  col.  609  sqq. 


512  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

where  the  payments  are  either  weekly,  monthly,  or  occasionally 
quarterly.  The  friendly  societies,  without  exception,  have  funeral 
benefits,  and  that  accounts  for  about  6,000,000.  The  collecting 
societies  are  about  7,000,000,  and  those  are  also  death  benefits. 
Then  the  great  industrial  insurance  companies  have  something  like 
30,000,000  policies.  There  is  hardly  a  household  in  this  country 
where  there  is  not  a  policy  of  insurance  against  death.  I  will  not 
stop  to  account  for  it.  After  all,  the  oldest  friendly  societies  in  the 
world  are  burial  societies.  All  I  would  say  here  is  we  do  not  pro- 
pose to  deal  with  insurance  against  death.  It  is  no  part  of  our 
scheme  at  all,  partly  because  the  ground  has  been  very  thoroughly 
covered,  although  not  very  satisfactorily  covered,  and  also  because 
this,  at  any  rate,  is  the  easiest  part  of  the  problem  and  is  a  part  of 
the  problem  which  is  not  beset  with  the  difficulties  of  vested  inter- 
ests. Fortunately,  all  the  vested  interests  which  deal  with  sickness 
and  unemployment  are  of  a  thoroughly  unselfish  and  beneficent 
character,  and  we  shall  be  able,  I  think,  to  assist  them,  not  merely 
without  interfering  with  their  rights  and  privileges,  but  by  encour- 
aging them  to  do  the  excellent  work  they  have  commenced  and 
which  they  are  doing  so  well. 

Sickness  comes  in  the  next  order  of  urgency  in  the  working- 
class  mind.  There  are  over  6,000,000  policies  —  that  is  hardly  the 
word,  perhaps,  for  friendly  societies,  but  there  is  provision  made  by 
6,000,000  people  against  sickness.  Most  of  it  includes  a  provision 
for  medical  aid.  There  are,  I  think,  about  300,000  or  400,000  mem- 
bers who  have  insured  for  medical  aid  alone,  but  I  think  almost 
without  exception  the  friendly  societies  include  medical  relief  in  the 
provisions  which  they  make.  That  is  not,  I  think,  the  case  with 
the  trade  unions.  There  are  700,000  members  in  the  trade  unions 
insured  for  sick  benefits,  but  I  do  not  think  that  includes  medical 
relief.  In  addition  to  those,  there  are  a  good  many  unregistered 
assurances  at  works,  where  a  man  leaves  a  shilling  a  month  at  the 
office  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  works'  doctor.  I  should  say, 
therefore,  that  between  6,000,000  and  7,000,000  people  in  this 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  513 

country  have  made  some  provision  against  sickness,  not  all  of  it 
adequate,  and  a  good  deal  of  it  defective. 

Then  comes  the  third  class,  the  insurance  against  unemployment. 
Here  not  a  tenth  of  the  working  classes  have  made  any  provision 
at  all.  You  have  got  only  1,400,000  workmen  who  have  insured 
against  unemployment.  It  is  true  that  perhaps  about  half  of  the 
employment  of  this  country  is  not  affected  by  the  fluctuations  of 
trade.  I  do  not  think  agricultural  labourers  or  railway  servants 
are  affected  quite  to  the  same  extent.  Then  there  is  provision  for 
short  time  in  some  of  the  trades.  Taking  the  precarious  trades 
affected  by  unemployment,  I  do  not  believe  more  than  one-third 
or  one-quarter  of  the  people  engaged  in  them  are  insured  against 
unemployment.  That  is  the  provision  which  is  made  at  the  present 
moment  by  the  working  classes:  42,000,000  policies  against  death, 
about  6,100,000  who  have  made  some  kind  of  provision  against 
sickness,  and  1,400,000  who  have  made  some  provision  against 
unemployment. 

Now  comes  the  question  which  leads  up  to  the  decision  of  the 
Government  to  take  action.  What  is  the  explanation  that  only  a 
portion  of  the  working  classes  have  made  provision  against  sickness 
and  unemployment?  Is  it  that  they  consider  it  not  necessary?  Quite 
the  reverse,  as  I  shall  prove  by  figures.  In  fact,  those  who  stand 
most  in  need  of  it  make  up  the  bulk  of  the  uninsured.  Why  ?  .  .  . 
The  first  explanation  is  that  their  wages  are  too  low.  I  am  talking 
now  about  the  uninsured  portion.  Their  wages  are  too  low  to  enable 
them  to  insure  without  some  assistance.  The  second  difficulty,  and 
it  is  the  greatest  of  all,  is  that  during  a  period  of  sickness  or  unem- 
ployment, when  they  are  earning  nothing,  they  cannot  keep  up  the 
premiums.  They  may  be  able  to  do  it  for  a  fortnight  or  three  weeks, 
but  when  times  of  very  bad  trade  come,  when  a  man  is  out  of  work 
for  weeks  and  weeks  at  a  time,  arrears  run  up  with  the  friendly 
societies,  and  when  a  man  gets  work,  it  may  be  at  the  end  of  two 
or  three  months,  those  are  not  the  first  arrears  which  have  to  be 
met.    There  are  arrears  of  rent,  arrears  of  the  grocery  bill,  and 


514  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

arrears  for  the  necessaries  of  life.  At  any  rate  he  cannot  consider 
his  friendly  society  only.  The  result  is  that  a  very  considerable 
number  of  workmen  find  themselves  quite  unable  to  keep  up  the 
premiums  when  they  have  a  family  to  look  after. 

Undoubtedly  there  is  another  reason.  It  is  no  use  shirking  the 
fact  that  a  proportion  of  workmen  with  good  wages  spend  them  in 
other  ways  and  therefore  have  nothing  to  spare  with  which  to  pay 
premiums  to  friendly  societies.  It  has  come  to  my  notice,  in  many 
of  these  cases,  that  the  women  of  the  family  make  most  heroic 
efforts  to  keep  up  the  premiums  to  the  friendly  societies,  and  the 
officers  of  the  friendly  societies  whom  I  have  seen,  have  amazed 
me  by  telling  the  proportion  of  premiums  of  this  kind  paid  by 
women  out  of  the  very  wretched  allowance  given  them  to  keep 
the  household  together. 

I  think  it  is  well  we  should  look  all  the  facts  in  the  face  before 
we  come  to  consider  the  remedy.  What  does  it  mean  in  the  way  of 
lapses  ?  I  have  inquired  of  friendly  societies,  and,  as  far  as  I  could 
get  at  it,  there  are  250,000  lapses  in  a  year.  That  is  a  very  consid- 
erable proportion  of  the  6,000,000  policies.  The  expectation  of  life 
at  twenty  is,  I  think,  a  little  over  forty  years,  and  it  means  that  in 
twenty  years'  time  there  are  5,000,000  lapses;  that  is,  people  who 
supported  and  joined  friendly  societies,  and  who  have  gone  on  pay- 
ing the  premiums  for  weeks,  months,  and  even  years,  struggling 
along  at  last,  when  a  very  bad  time  of  unemployment  comes,  drop 
out  and  the  premium  lapses.  It  runs  to  millions  in  the  course  of  a 
generation.  What  does  that  mean  ?  It  means  that  the  vast  major- 
ity of  the  workingmen  of  this  country  at  one  time  or  other  have 
been  members  of  friendly  societies,  have  felt  the  need  for  provision 
of  this  kind,  and  it  is  only  because  they  have  been  driven  —  some- 
times by  their  own  habits,  but  in  the  majority  of  cases  by  circum- 
stances over  which  they  have  no  control — to  abandon  their  policies. 
That  is  the  reason  why,  at  the  present  moment,  not  one-half  the 
workmen  of  this  country  have  made  any  provision  for  sickness 
and  not  one-tenth  for  unemployment.    I  think  it  necessary  to  state 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  515 

these  facts  in  order  to  show  that  there  is  a  real  need  for  some 
system  which  would  aid  the  workmen  over  these  difficulties.  I  do 
not  think  there  is  any  better  method,  or  one  more  practical  at  the 
present  moment,  than  a  system  of  national  insurance  which  would 
invoke  the  aid  of  the  State  and  the  aid  of  the  employer  to  enable 
the  workman  to  get  over  all  these  difficulties  and  make  provision 
for  himself  for  sickness,  and  as  far  as  the  most  precarious  trades 
are  concerned,  against  unemployment. 

I  come  at  once  to  the  plan  of  the  Government.  The  measure 
of  the  Government  is  divided  into  two  parts.:  the  first  will  deal 
with  sickness  and  the  second  with  unemployment.  The  sickness 
branch  of  the  Bill  will  also  be  in  two  sections :  one  will  be  compul- 
sory, and  the  other  voluntary.  The  compulsory  part  of  the  Bill  in- 
volves a  compulsory  deduction  from  the  wages  of  all  the  employed 
classes  who  earn  weekly  wages,  or  whose  earnings  are  under  the 
Income  Tax  limit.  There  will  be  a  contribution  from  the  employer 
and  a  further  contribution  from  the  State. 

There  are  exceptions  from  the  compulsory  clause.  The  first  will 
be  in  the  Army  and  Navy.  We  are  making  special  provision  for 
soldiers  and  sailors.  It  is  a  crying  scandal,  I  think,  that  at  the 
present  moment  there  are  so  many  soldiers  and  sailors  who  have 
placed  their  lives  at  the  disposal  of  the  country  and  are  quite  ready 
to  sacrifice  them,  as  we  know  from  past  experience  —  not  merely 
that  they  should  be  liable  to,  but  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  hundreds 
and  thousands  do  actually  leave  the  Army  and  Navy  broken  through 
ill-health.  I  am  talking  now  of  ill-health  not  due  to  misconduct. 
These  men  leave  the  Army  without  any  provision  from  either  pub- 
lic or  private  charity,  and  they  are  broken  men  for  the  rest  of 
their  lives.  I  think  it  is  a  crying  scandal  that  that  should  occur  in 
a  country  like  this,  and  I  hope  this  scheme  will  put  an  end  to  it. 
There  will  be  special  provision  made  for  that.  But  these  men  will  not 
be  regarded  as  in  the  employed  class  for  the  purposes  I  am  about 
to  explain.  The  same  thing  applies  to  the  teachers,  and  I  hope  to 
be  able,  with  the  assistance  of  my  right  hon.  Friend  the  President 


5i6  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

of  the  Board  of  Education  [Mr.  Walter  Runciman],  to  largely 
strengthen  their  present  position.  I  think  their  provision  is  very 
inadequate,  and,  compared  with  the  provisions  made  in  other  coun- 
tries, I  think  a  very  paltry  allowance  is  made  for  their  superannuation. 

Mr.  John  Redmond  :  Does  that  apply  to  Ireland  ? 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  Certainly,  I  think  the  Irish  case  a  very 
bad  case.  I  have  had  a  number  of  Irish  teachers  before  me,  and 
some  of  them  told  me  that  they  were  getting  about  ^i  a  week. 
There  are  about  300  of  them  in  the  workhouses.  They  are  doing 
their  work  for  the  Empire  under  very  trying  conditions,  and  I  shall 
certainly  consider  it  the  duty  of  the  Government  in  any  scheme 
of  superannuation  to  include  the  Irish  teachers  as  well. 

Mr.  John  Redmond  :  When  ? 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  I  hope  it  will  be  possible  this  year.  We 
propose  excepting  all  people  employed  under  the  Crown  or  under 
municipalities  where,  at  the  present  moment,  there  is  no  deduction 
from  their  wages  when  they  are  ill,  and  where  there  is  some  super- 
annuation allowance.  There  is  no  need  to  make  provision  for  them 
because  provision  is  already  made.  The  same  thing  will  apply  to 
commission  agents  employed  by  more  than  one  person.  There  is 
also  an  exception  in  the  case  of  casual  labour  employed  otherwise 
than  for  the  purpose  of  the  employer's  trade  or  business.  We  think 
it  is  vital  that  casual  labour  should  be  included.  Otherwise  the  same 
thing  may  happen  here  as  I  am  told  happens  in  Germany,  where 
the  exclusion  of  casual  labour  is  rather  encouraging  its  growth. 
That  is  a  very  bad  thing  in  itself,  and  there  is  really  no  class 
which  it  is  more  important  to  include  than  casual  labour. 

Sir  C.  Kinloch-Cooke  :  Does  that  include  casual  labour  in 
dockyards  ? 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  Casual  labour  at  dockyards  and  in  ware- 
houses will  be  included.  I  think,  too,  that  casual  labour  such  as 
that  of  golf  caddies  should  be  brought  in.  I  am  making  special  pro- 
vision for  labour  of  that  kind.  Hotel  waiters  will  be  another  dif- 
ficulty.   They  are  not  paid  salaries.    I  am  told  that  they  very  often 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  517 

pay  for  the  privilege  of  waiting,  and  we  have  to  make  special  pro- 
vision for  them.  Cab  drivers  are  another  class  we  propose  to  in- 
clude. All  casual  labour  of  this  kind  will  be  included,  as  well  as 
casual  labour  of  the  kind  referred  to  by  the  hon.  Member  oppo- 
site. The  man  who  offers  to  carry  your  bag  for  sixpence  you  can 
never  draw  in,  but  it  is  our  intention  to  attract  all  casual  labour 
possible  within  the  ambit  of  our  Bill. 

Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain  :  Are  we  to  understand  that  all  the 
classes  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  has  enumerated  are  ex- 
ceptions to  the  compulsory  provisions  which  he  is  about  to  describe  .'' 

Mr.  Lloyd  George  :  Certainly  they  can  come  in  the  voluntary 
part  if  they  like,  so  long  as  they  answer  to  the  definition  which  I 
have  given.  I  think  that  is  rather  anticipating,  but  the  right  hon. 
Gentleman  will  later  on  find  what  class  of  persons  will  come  in.  I 
come  to  the  amount  of  contribution.  The  workman  now  pays  to 
his  friendly  society  6d.  or  is.  The  usual  contribution  to  a  friendly 
society  is  something  between  6d.  and  gd.  as  far  as  I  have  been 
able  to  discover,  and  anything  under  that  produces  benefits  which 
are  benefits  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  worth  our  while  to  include 
in  an  Act  of  Parliament.  The  House  will  be  interested  to  know 
what  German  workmen  have  to  pay,  because  that  was  the  first 
great  scientific  experiment  in  insurance  on  a  national  scale.  It 
has  been  enormously  successful.  That  is  the  testimony  borne  by 
all  classes  of  Germans.  I  have  taken  some  trouble  to  inquire,  and 
the  German  Government  have  been  exceedingly  kind  and  helpful 
in  placing  information  at  our  disposal.  They  have  shown  every 
disposition  to  be  helpful  throughout,  and  their  testimony  is  that 
all  classes  of  the  community  are  very  much  benefited  by  it.  In 
Germany  the  payment  is  in  proportion  to  wages,  and  the  benefits 
are  also  in  proportion  to  wages,  so  that  the  higher  class  of  work- 
man, who  pays  a  very  high  contribution,  gets  a  very  substantial 
benefit.  There  are  in  Germany,  I  think,  five  classes  of  individual 
contributors,  and  for  sickness  every  man  pays  according  to  his  in- 
come.   They  divide  their  insurance  into  two  separate  branches  of 


5l8  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

sickness  and  invalidity.  There  are  two  separate  branches,  but  we 
propose  to  include  them  in  one  branch.  In  Germany  a  man  who 
earns  30s.  pays  io|d.  weekly  for  sickness  and  invalidity.  There  are 
not  many  of  these.  The  man  who  is  paid  24s.  a  week,  which  I 
think  is  about  the  average  wage  in  this  country,  if  you  were  to 
strike  an  average,  which  is  a  difficult  thing  to  do  — •  the  man  who  is 
paid  24s.  a  week  pays  gd.  a  week.  For  that  gd.  the  benefits  he 
gets  will  not  be  equal  to  the  benefits  we  shall  be  able  to  give  under 
our  Bill  twenty  years  hence.  The  20s.  a  week  man  pays  y^d.,  the 
i8s.  man  6fd.,  the  15s.  man  5Jd.,  the  12s.  man  4fd.,  and  the  9s. 
man  3|d. 

That  is  what  the  workman  pays  in  Germany,  and  when  you 
come  down  to  these  lower  classes,  the  benefits  are  so  small  that  the 
workmen  in  Germany  say  they  prefer  to  resort  to  parish  relief,  as 
the  benefits  are  much  too  inadequate.  For  that  reason  we  have  de- 
cided in  favour  of  one  class,  because  if  you  have  a  scale  which  is 
proportionate,  it  would  be  very  difficult  to  give  benefits  to  the  lower 
class  except  by  making  special  conditions  which  it  would  not  be 
worth  our  while  to  make.  It  would  certainly  not  give  them  a  mini- 
mum allowance  to  keep  their  families  from  want.  So  we  have  de- 
cided to  have  one  scale  for  all  classes,  with  a  provision  for  the  low- 
est wages.  Therefore,  we  have  decided  to  propose  a  deduction  of 
4d.  for  men  and  3d.  for  women.  That  is  about  a  halfpenny  a  day 
and  a  penny  on  Saturday,  or,  as  somebody  told  me,  about  the  price 
of  two  pints  of  the  cheapest  beer  per  week,  or  the  price  of  an  ounce 
of  tobacco.  Now  comes  the  difficulty  of  the  man  who  is  earning 
15  s.  a  week  and  under,  and  who  finds  it  rather  difficult  to  pay  4d. 
a  week.  We  meet  that  case  by  saying  that  a  man  or  a  woman  who 
earns  2s.  6d.  a  day  or  less  shall  pay  3d.,  2s.  or  less,  2d.,  and  is. 
6d.  a  day  or  less,  id.  a  week.  Let  me  make  a  very  important  ex- 
ception. That  would  not  include  the  cases  where  there  is  board 
and  lodging  in  addition  to  the  wage.  These  cases  are  excluded 
altogether.  This  is  purely  the  case  where  the  wage  represents 
the  whole  payment. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  519 

Who  will  pay  the  difference  ?  If  you  make  the  State  pay  the 
difference,  then  it  means  that  the  employers  who  pay  high  wages 
to  their  workmen  will  be  taxed  for  the  purpose  of  making  up  the 
diminished  charge  for  the  workmen  of  other  employers  who  are 
paying  less,  and  I  do  not  think  that  would  be  fair.  We  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  difference  ought  to  be  made  up  by  the 
employer  who  profits  by  cheap  labour,  and  therefore  in  the  lowest 
case  (in  the  case  of  15  s.  a  week  and  downwards)  the  employer  will 
pay  more.  I  hope  I  have  made  it  clear  that  our  scale  of  deduction 
for  the  workmen  is  a  uniform  one,  with  the  exception  of  that 
descending  scale  when  you  come  to  the  very  lowest  wages  and 
where  you  cannot  really  expect  a  man  to  pay  4d.  a  week. 

There  is  another  difficulty.  Are  we  going  to  include  in  the  bene- 
fits of  the  scheme  men  of  all  ages  at  the  present  moment  ?  If  we 
are,  on  what  scale  ?  Are  we  going  to  charge  the  man  of  fifty  more 
than  the  man  of  twenty-five .''  That  is  a  question  which  of  course 
presents  itself  the  moment  you  begin  to  consider  the  actuarial  posi- 
tion, because,  after  all,  sickness  doubles,  trebles,  and  quadruples  as 
you  get  along  in  life,  until  when  you  get  between  sixty-five  and  sev- 
enty the  average  sickness  in  five  years  is  fifty-two  weeks.  It  begins 
with  three  or  four  days,  then  on  to  a  week,  then  to  a  fortnight, 
and  a  man  as  he  gets  on  in  life  becomes  a  heavier  charge  upon 
his  friendly  society,  and  no  society  can  possibly  take  a  man  at  fifty 
or  fifty-five  on  the  same  terms  as  if  he  were  only  sixteen  or  twenty 
unless  they  make  special  provision.  Of  course,  we  are  now  starting 
a  new  scheme,  and  the  Government  have  decided  to  do  this  —  to 
charge  a  perfectly  uniform  rate  throughout.  .  .  .  The  only  differ- 
ence we  make  is  with  regard  to  men  over  fifty.  We  then  propose 
to  pay  them  reduced  benefits.  Men  who  are  over  sixty-five  at  the 
present  moment  we  do  not  propose  should  join  the  scheme  at  all, 
because  that  is  an  impossible  undertaking  ;  th*e  burden  would  be 
much  too  heavy,  and,  after  all,  we  must  be  fair  to  the  man  who 
comes  in  young  with  his  money.  He  must  be  encouraged,  he  must 
get  his  reward  for  it,  and  if  we  take  over  too  heavy  a  burden  in 


520  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  way  of  those  who  are  at  present  very  old,  the  young  people 
will  suffer.  I  am  told  that  is  the  criticism  in  Germany  —  that  the 
young  people  do  not  get  full  value  for  their  own  money  and  the 
money  of  their  employers.  We  propose  to  admit  everyone  up  to 
sixty-five  to  insurance  so  long  as  it  is  done  within  twelve  months 
after  the  passing  of  the  Act.  We  are  going  to  give  twelve  months' 
grace.  If  they  come  in  after  twelve  months,  they  will  come  in  on 
the  terms  either  of  paying  a  rate  appropriate  to  their  age  or  of 
taking  reduced  benefits,  which  comes  to  practically  the  same  thing. 
So  much  for  the  contribution  by  the  employee.  Now  we  come  to 
the  contribution  of  the  employer.  What  interest  has  the  employer 
in  the  matter  ?  His  interest  is  the  efficiency  of  his  workmen,  and 
there  is  no  doubt  at  all  that  a  great  insurance  scheme  of  this  kind 
removes  a  strain  of  pressing  burden  and  anxiety  from  the  shoulders 
of  the  working  classes  and  increases  the  efficiency  of  the  workmen 
enormously.  The  workingmen  whom  I  met  during  the  trades-union 
movement  told  me  that  many  a  time  they  used  to  go  on  working 
at  their  business  because  they  dared  not  give  it  up,  as  they  could 
not  afford  to,  and  it  would  have  been  better  for  them  to  have  been 
in  the  doctor's  hands.  This  procedure  generally  brings  about  a  very 
bad  breakdown,  and  not  only  that,  when  a  man  is  below  par  neither 
the  quantity  nor  the  quality  of  his  work  is  ver\'  good.  I  have  taken 
the  trouble  to  make  some  inquiry  from  the  German  employers  as 
to  their  experience  of  insurance  from  this  point  of  view,  and  I  have 
got  a  number  of  answers  which,  perhaps,  later  on  the  House  would 
be  interested  in  having  circulated.  Here  is  one  instance  I  had  out 
of  many.  It  is  the  opinion  of  an  employer  engaged  in  the  steel 
industr)'.  He  said,  "  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Insurance 
Laws,  together  with  the  increase  of  wages,  have  exercised  an  enor- 
mously beneficial  influence  upon  the  health,  standard  of  living,  and 
the  efficiency  of  workers."  Another  great  employer  of  labour  says 
that  "  from  the  employers'  standpoint  these  laws  pay,  since  the 
efficiency  of  the  workman  is  increased."  And  now  there  is  this 
ver}^  curious   position   i.i   Germany  that  the   employers,   and   the 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  52 1 

largest  employers,  are  voluntarily  offering  to  increase  their  contri- 
butions to  national  insurance  for  increased  benefits.  That  is  the 
view  taken  by  the  employer  in  Germany.  What  does  he  pay  for 
sickness  and  invalidity  insurance?  He  pays  for  a  3bs.  a  week  man 
7J-d.  For  a  24s.  a  week  man  the  employer  would  pay  5|d.  and 
for  an  i8s.  a  week  man  he  pays  4Jd.  ;  then  when  it  goes  down 
below  that  the  contribution  is  very  much  lower,  and  the  benefits  are 
very  poor.  We  propose  that  the  employer  should  pay  3d.  a  week  ; 
the  workman  will  pay  4d.,  or  3d.  for  a  woman,  and  the  employer 
will  pay  3d.  for  man  and  woman  alike.    That  is  our  proposal. 

I  come  to  the  contribution  of  the  State.  The  advantage  of  the 
scheme  to  the  State  is,  of  course,  in  happy,  contented,  and  pros- 
perous people.  The  German  contribution  is  not  a  very  large  one. 
I  believe  it  is  about  ;^2,5oo,ooo,  and  that  includes  Old  Age  Pen- 
sions. We  have  already  got  a  burden  of  ^13,000,000  a  year  for 
Old  Age  Pensions.  But  let  me  point  this  out  to  the  House  —  that 
payment  is  equivalent  to  something  like  5d.  a  week  for  employer 
and  labourer  under  this  scheme  —  and  it  makes  matters  very  much 
easier.  We  certainly  could  not  have  offered  the  benefits  which  we 
are  offering  in  this  measure  —  4d.  for  a  workman  and  3d.  for  an  em- 
ployer —  had  it  not  been  that  the  whole  burden  of  pensions  over 
seventy  years  of  age  had  been  taken  over  by  the  State.  I'hat  is 
the  first  actuarial  fact  which  was  borne  in  upon  me  the  moment  I 
came  in  contact  with  the  actualities  —  what  an  enormous  difference 
that  made  in  the  scheme,  and  how  it  eased  matters.  Had  it  not 
been  for  that  I  should  have  proposed  very  much  dearer  and  sterner 
terms  both  for  the  employer  and  the  employed.  We  do  not  propose 
that  the  State  contribution  should  end  with  that  ^13,000,000.  We 
propose  that  the  State  contribution  shall  be  the  equivalent  of  2d.  a 
member — 4d.  from  a  workman,  3d.  from  an  employer,  and  2d.  from 
the  State.  .  .  . 

What  is  the  workman  to  do  when  he  is  out  of  work  ?  How  is 
he  to  pay  his  contributions  ?  We  propose  allowing  a  6  per  cent 
margin  for  unemployed  ;  that  means  three  weeks  a  year.    As  long 


522  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

as  a  man  is  employed  you  deduct  4d.,  but  we  allow  a  margin  of 
three  weeks  a  year  for  unemployment.  That  means  in  a  cycle,  say, 
of  four  years  —  bad  times  may  come  once  every  four  years  let  us 
say  —  a  margin  of  twelve  weeks  of  unemployment.  We  propose 
to  do  more  than  that.  After  he  has  exhausted  his  twelve  weeks,  if 
he  still  is  unemployed,  then  up  to  25  per  cent  —  that  means  thirteen 
weeks  a  year  —  we  still  allow  him,  but  at  reduced  benefits.  .  .  . 

I  now  come  to  the  voluntary  contributors.  There  are  two  classes 
of  voluntary  contributors.  There  are  persons  who,  whilst  not 
working  for  an  employer,  are  engaged  in  some  regular  occupation 
and  are  mainly  dependent  on  their  earnings  for  their  livelihood. 
Take  the  village  blacksmith  who  is  not  working  for  any  employer, 
but  is  depending  on  his  earnings  for  his  livelihood.  The  same  thing 
will  apply  to  the  small  tradesman.  I  find  looking  through  the  lists 
of  the  friendly  societies,  in  some  of  them  there  is  a  very  high  per- 
centage of  men  who  do  not  belong  to  the  employed  class  in  the 
ordinary  sense  of  the  term.  For  instance,  in  rural  districts  you 
will  find  that  all  the  publicans,  all  the  tradesmen,  the  schoolmaster, 
the  village  blacksmith,  and  the  man  who  is  joinering  on  his  own, 
who  is  not  anybody's  man,  are  members-  of  the  friendly  societies. 
We  propose  that  they  should  be  allowed  to  be  members  of  this 
insurance  scheme.  They  are  really  a  great  source  of  strength  to 
the  friendly  societies.  They  help  them  in  the  management,  and 
their  business  knowledge  is  of  infinite  value.  It  would  be  a  great 
accession  of  strength  to  any  scheme  of  this  kind  that  we  should 
still  retain  in  it  men  of  that  type. 

Then  there  is  the  other  class  of  men  —  those  who  have  been 
employed  working  for  others  and  have  ceased  to  do  so,  and  are 
working  on  their  own  account.  So  long  as  they  have  been  contrib- 
utors for  five  years,  we  allow  them  still  to  join.  With  regard  to 
this  class,  there  is  a  difficulty  in  allowing  them  to  come  in  at  any 
age.  .  .  .  We  propose  that  all  those  of  that  class  who  wish  to  join 
within  six  months,  and  who  are  forty-five  years  of  age  and  under, 
can  join  at  a  rate  which  covers  the  4d.  or  3d.,  as  the  case  may  be, 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  523 

whether  they  are  men  or  women,  they  themselves  paying  the  em- 
ployers' contribution.  That  would  mean  that  they  would  pay  yd. 
for  men  and  6d.  for  women,  and  they,  of  course,  get  the  benefit 
of  the  State  contribution.  Those  over  forty-five  join- at  rates  appro- 
priate to  their  ages,  but  they  also  get  the  benefit  of  the  State 
contribution  for  what  it  is  worth  to  them,  and,  of  course,  it  is 
worth  a  good  deal. 

Another  exception  we  are  bound  to  make  to  this  class  of  vol- 
untary contributors.  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  advisable  to  allow 
married  women  who  are  not  workers  to  join.  .  .  .  You  have,  I 
think,  about  700,000  married  women  who  are  workers  and  come 
into  the  compulsory  scheme  as  workers,  but  I  do  not  think  we  can 
possibly  agree  to  married  women  unless  they  are  workers.  .   .   . 

As  to  employed  contributors,  we  anticipate  that  9,200,000  men 
will  be  in  the  compulsory  class,  and  there  will  be  3,900,000  women, 
making  a  total  of  13,100,000  in  that  class.  Then  the  voluntary 
contributors  will  number  600,000  men  and  200,000  women,  making 
a  total  of  800,000.  .  .  .  With  the  800,000  voluntary  contribu- 
tors, the  total  will  be  9,800,000  men,  4,100,000  women,  making 
13,900,000  altogether.  But  to  that  has  got  to  be  added  800,000 
persons  under  sixteen  years  of  age,  consisting  of  500,000  boys  and 
300,000  girls.  That  makes  a  grand  total  of  14,700,000  persons 
who  shall,  we  hope,  enjoy  the  insurance  scheme. 

Now  I  come  to  benefits.  These  will  be  distributed  under  three 
or  four  different  heads.  There  will  be  medical  relief.  There  will  be 
the  curing  side  of  the  benefit,  and  there  will  also  be  allowance  for 
the  maintenance  of  a  man  and  his  family  during  the  time  of  his 
sickness.  ...  If  one  of  the  14,700,000  persons,  who  practically 
include  all  the  industrial  population  of  this  country,  falls  ill,  he  can 
command  the  service  of  a  competent  doctor,  and  command  it  with 
the  knowledge  that  he  can  pay.  But  not  only  that,  the  doctor 
whose  service  he  commands  will  know  also  that  he  will  be  paid. 
That  is  going  to  make  a  very  great  difference  in  the  doctoring  of 
these  people.  .  .  . 


524  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

The  second  branch  of  medical  attention  will  be  in  cases  of  mater- 
nity. There  are  only  one  or  two  friendly  societies  at  the  present 
moment  which  allow  any  maternity  benefit,  but  they  are  all  alive 
to  the  necessit)^  of  it,  and  they  are  gradually  going  to  establish 
branches  for  maternity  benefit.  Undoubtedly  there  is  no  more 
urgent  need.  Women  of  the  working  classes  in  critical  cases  are 
neglected  sadly,  sometimes  through  carelessness  but  oftener  through 
poverty,  and  that  is  an  injury  not  only  to  the  woman  herself,  but 
to  the  children  who  are  bom.  A  good  deal  of  infant  mortality  and 
a  good  deal  of  anaemic  and  rickety  disease  among  the  poorer  class 
of  children  is  very  often  due  to  the  neglect  in  motherhood.  .  .  . 
We  propose  that  there  should  be  a  30s.  benefit  in  those  cases 
which  would  cover  the  doctoring  and  the  nursing,  but  only  con- 
ditional upon  those  who  are  women  workers  not  returning  to  work 
for  four  weeks,  for  I  am  told  that  in  the  mills  you  have  very 
often  cases  where  the  women  work  up  to  the  last  moment  and 
the  matemit)^  is  over  in  a  comparatively  few  days.    .   .    . 

I  have  now  to  refer  to  another  branch  of  medical  benefit.  We 
propose  to  do  something  to  deal  with  the  terrible  scourge  of  con- 
sumption. There  are,  I  believe,  in  this  country  about  four  or  five 
hundred  thousand  persons  suffering  from  tubercular  disease.  .  .  . 
There  are  75,000  deaths  every  year  in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland 
from  tuberculosis  and,  a  much  more  serious  matter,  if  you  take  the 
ages  between  fourteen  and  fifty-five  among  males,  one  out  of  three 
dies  of  tuberculosis  between  those  ages  in  what  should  be  the  very- 
period  of  greatest  strength  and  vigour  and  service.  It  is  a  very 
sinister  fact  that  at  the  ver}'  period  which  is  responsible  for  the 
continued  life  of  the  race  one  out  of  three  between  those  ages  is 
stricken  down  by  tuberculosis.  It  kills  as  many  in  the  kingdom  in 
a  single  year  as  all  the  zymotic  diseases  put  together,  and  a  ver)' 
terrible  fact  in  connection  with  it  is  that  the  moment  a  man  is 
attacked  and  compromised  he  becomes  a  recruit  in  the  destruc- 
tive army  and  proceeds  to  injure  mortally  even  those  to  whom  he 
is  most  attached  and  to  scatter  infection  and  death  in  his  own 


NATIONAL   INSURANCE  525 

household.  .  .  .  The  proposal  of  the  Government  is  that  we  should 
first  of  all  assist  local  charities  and  local  authorities  to  build  sanatoria 
throughout  the  country.  We  propose  to  set  aside  ;^i,5oo,ooo  of  a 
capital  sum  for  the  purpose  .  .  .  and  a  fund  of  a  million  a  year 
for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  these  institutions.   .   .   . 

I  come  next  to  the  sick  allowance  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining 
the  families  of  the  sick  persons  who  are  insured.  In  the  friendly 
societies  I  think  the  allowance  is  six  months,  then  it  is  dropped 
again  to  half.  In  some  societies  it  is  still  further  dropped,  generally 
at  twelve  months.  I  propose  that  the  first  stage  should  be  a  three 
months'  grant,  because  the  real  reason  why  six  months'  allowance 
is  given  is  because  of  tubercular  patients.  They  are  the  people  who 
take  over  three  months  on  the  fund.  Outside  of  them  a  man  is 
generally  cured  or  off  the  funds  before  that  period.  I  propose  that 
in  the  first  three  months  there  should  be  an  allowance  of  los.  per 
week.  Power  will  be  given  to  the  society  to  extend  that  to  twenty- 
six  weeks  if  they  think  it  necessary.  I  point  out  later  on  that  there 
are  funds  for  that  purpose,  but,  perhaps,  at  any  rate,  a  start  should 
be  made  with  three  months  at  los.  Afterwards  the  allowance  will 
be  reduced  to  5s.  for  another  three  months.  After  that,  at  the  end 
of  six  months,  if  a  man  is  broken  down  altogether,  there  is  a  per- 
manent disablement  allowance  of  5s.  as  long  as  he  is  unable  to  earn 
his  living  in  any  way.  That  is  for  men.  For  women  the  contribu- 
tion is  lower,  and,  as  we  are  keeping  the  accounts  separate,  the 
actuaries  say  we  would  not  be  justified  in  giving  more  than  7s.  6d. 
per  week  for  the  first  three  months,  and  then  5  s.  We  do  not  pro- 
pose to  make  the  allowance  less  in  that  case. 

There  will  be  a  waiting  period  of  six  months  in  the  case  of 
sickness.  No  man  will  be  allowed  to  get  his  sickness  allowance 
within  six  months  after  he  has  joined  the  society.  No  man  is  en- 
titled to  claim  for  a  disablement  allowance  unless  he  has  paid  for 
two  years.  In  Germany  that  has  been  extended  to  five  years.  The 
allowance  is  conditional  in  every  case  on  the  patient  obeying  the 
doctor's  orders  —  a  very  difficult  thing  to  do.    But  at  any  rate  you 


526  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

cannot  allow  a  man  artificially  to  perpetuate  his  sickness  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  community  by  defying  every  rule  that  is  laid  down  for 
his  cure  by  the  professional  gentleman  who  is  in  charge  of  him.  In 
Germany  they  have  this  power.  They  give  instructions  as  to  what 
a  man  is  to  do,  and  if  he  does  not  obey  them,  his  allowance  is  docked, 
and  I  think  it  is  a  very  salutary  rule.  I  have  no  doubt  that  it  will 
be  very  liberally  interpreted,  but  still  it  is  a  very  necessary  rule. 
There  is  another  rule.  The  friendly  societies  do  not  admit  sick 
allowance  to  any  man  whose  illness  is  due  to  his  own  misconduct. 
What  we  have  done  in  that  case  is  this.  If  a  man's  illness  is  due 
to  his  own  misconduct,  we  do  not  allow  him  sick  pay,  but  he  is  en- 
titled to  a  doctor,  not  merely  for  his  own  sake,  but  for  the  sake  of 
the  community,  and  because  eventually  he  will  come  back  again, 
and  he  will  fall  on  the  sick  fund,  and  the  burden  will  be  much 
heavier.  Now  I  come  to  the  exceptions.  In  the  case  of  persons 
fifty  years  of  age  at  the  date  of  insurance  the  men  will  only  be  en- 
titled to  ys.  a  week  and  the  women  to  6s.  a  week,  unless  they  have 
paid  500  contributions.  Men  and  women  over  sixty  years  of  age 
will  only  be  entitled  to  5  s.  Persons  under  twenty-one  years  of  age, 
if  unmarried,  will  be  entitled  to  5s.,  if  males,  and  to  4s.,  if  females. 
There  is  another  very  important  exception  from  the  point  of  view 
of  checking  malingering.  WTien  you  come  to  the  lower  rate  of 
wages  you  must  not  give  a  sick  allowance  which  would  make  it 
more  profitable  for  a  man  to  be  sick  than  to  be  working.  There- 
fore, we  propose  that  where  the  sick  benefit  is  more  than  two-thirds 
of  the  wages  the  amount  shall  be  reduced.  .  .  . 

After  paying  for  the  doctor,  after  paying  for  the  sanatorium,  after 
paying  maternity  benefit,  after  paying  ids.  a  week  and  5s.  sick 
allowance,  and  ys.  6d.  for  women,  there  will  be  left  a  balance  of 
;^i,75o,ooo  in  the  hands  of  those  who  administer  the  funds.  That 
is  the  actuarial  calculation.  We  do  not  now  propose  to  distribute 
those  benefits,  because  we  want  to  give  an  interest  to  those  who 
are  administering  the  funds,  to  administer  them  economically  and 
to  declare  alternative  benefits,  if  they  save  the  amounts  which  we 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  527 

anticipate  they  can  save.  We  propose,  therefore,  to  have  a  list  of 
alternative  benefits,  optional  benefits,  and  additional  benefits.  The 
first  benefits,  as  I  have  indicated,  will  be  the  compulsory  minimum 
benefits.  They  will  be  in  every  scheme.  I  now  come  to  the  addi- 
tional benefits  from  which  the  society  may  choose,  with  this  surplus 
at  their  disposal.  This  surplus  will  be  ;^i,75o,ooo  immediately  the 
scheme  begins  to  work,  but  at  the  end  of  fifteen  years  and  a  half, 
when  the  loss  on  the  older  persons  has  been  wiped  out,  you  will 
then  have  an  addition  of  something  like  ;!^5,5oo,ooo  to  the  fund, 
and,  of  course,  that  will  involve  a  further  contribution  from  the 
State  of  ^1,500,000  per  annum.  That  means  ;^7,ooo,ooo.  .  .  . 
I  have  a  long  list  of  additional  benefits  which  they  can  choose,  but 
I  think  the  most  interesting  of  all  would  be  that  when  the  fifteen 
and  a  half  years  had  elapsed,  when  the  loss  has  been  paid  off,  and 
when  you  have  released  a  fund  of  ;^7,ooo,ooo  between  the  State 
and  the  contributors,  we  shall  then  be  within  sight  of  declaring 
either  a  pension  at  sixty-five,  or,  what  I  think  would  be  better  still 
— ■  and  I  propose  this  as  an  alternative  —  if  a  man  does  not  choose 
to  take  his  pension  at  sixty-five,  but  prefers  to  go  on  working,  he 
shall  increase  his  pension  at  a  later  stage  in  proportion  to  each  ad- 
ditional year  he  goes  on  working.    So  much  for  the  benefits. 

I  now  come  to  the  machinery  of  the  Bill  we  have  got  to  work. 
Collection  is  the  first  thing.  We  shall  collect  our  funds  by  means 
of  stamps.  That  is  purely  the  German  system.  A  card  is  given 
to  a  workman  ;  he  takes  it  to  his  employer  at  the  end  of  the  week  ; 
the  employer  puts  on  the  workman's  4d.  stamp  and  his  own  3d. 
stamp ;  he  deducts  the  4d.  out  of  the  wages  of  the  man,  and  he 
pays  the  3d.  himself ;  the  card  is  in  the  possession  of  the  man, 
who  takes  it  to  the  post  office,  whence  it  is  transmitted  to  the  cen- 
tral office.  The  employer  does  not  necessarily  know  —  there  is  noth- 
ing on  the  face  of  the  card  to  say  —  what  society  the  man  belongs 
to.  It  is  entirely  a  matter  for  himself.  The  card  is  sent  along  to  the 
central  office,  and  the  whole  of  the  money  is  paid  to  the  central 
office. 


528  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Then  comes  the  question,  Who  is  to  dispense  the  benefits  ?  In 
this  country  we  have  fortunately  a  number  of  well-organised,  well- 
managed,  well-conducted  benefit  societies  who  have  a  great  tradi- 
tion behind  them  and  an  accumulation  of  experience  which  is  very 
valuable  when  you  come  to  deal  with  questions  like  malingering. 
We  propose,  as  far  as  we  possibly  can,  to  work  through  those 
societies.  We  propose  that  all  the  benefits  shall  be  dispensed 
through  what  the  Bill  would  call  ''  approved  societies." 

What  are  the  conditions  attaching  to  an  approved  society?  It 
must  be  a  society  with  at  least  10,000  members ;  otherwise,  it  be- 
comes a  matter  of  very  great  complication,  which  is  much  more 
difficult  to  manage  from  the  actuarial  and  financial  point  of  view. 
It  must  be  precluded  by  its  constitution  from  distributing  any  of 
its  funds  otherwise  than  by  the  way  of  benefits,  whether  benefits 
under  this  Act  or  not,  amongst  its  members.  It  must  not  be  a 
dividing  society ;  it  must  be  a  benefit  society  which  provides  for 
sickness  and  for  old  age.  Therefore  it  cannot  be  a  society  that 
divides  its  profits  at  the  end  of  each  year.  It  cannot  be  a  society 
that  allows  anybody  to  make  a  profit  out  of  this  branch  of  its 
business,  and  it  must  be  mutual  so  far  as  this  branch  of  its  business 
is  concerned.  Its  affairs  must  be  subject  to  the  absolute  control  of 
its  own  members  ;  it  must  be  self-governing,  and  its  constitution 
must  provide  for  the  election  of  its  committees,  representatives, 
and  officers.  There  are  other  conditions.  It  must  provide  a  rea- 
sonable security  that  the  funds  will  be  dispensed  in  the  way  the 
Act  provides.  It  must  have  local  committees.  There  are  several 
societies,  as  hon.  Members  know  very  well,  which  have  branches. 
There  are  other  societies  which  are  purely  central.  Both  are  very 
excellent  societies  in  their  way.  The  Hearts  of  Oak,  I  believe,  is 
a  centralised  society.  The  Foresters,  I  believe,  is  a  society  with 
branches,  and  the  Odd  Fellows  the  same.  But  the  societies  which 
have  central  control  and  no  branches  must  have  some  sort  of  local 
committees  and  management ;  otherwise  it  will  be  quite  impossible 
to  distribute  the  benefits,  and  it  will  be  very  difficult  to  arrange 


NATIONAL   INSURANCE  529 

about  doctoring  and  other  matters.  There  are  other  things  about 
keeping  books  and  so  forth.  .  .  . 

You  may  find  men  who  say,  ''We  will  not  join  any  society." 
You  cannot  compel  a  man  to  join  a  society.  If  he  chooses  to 
remain  outside,  he  can  do  so,  but  he  does  it  at  his  own  cost.  Every 
inducement  is  offered  to  a  man  in  this  scheme  to  join  a  society, 
and  I  will  show  how  that  works.  We  propose  that  all  the  men  in 
a  county  who  have  not  joined  a  society  should  be  collected  together 
in  a  body  called  Post  Office  Contributors.  You  will  form  a  fund 
of  those  people.  Most  of  the  people  who  remain  outside  will  be 
uninsurable  lives,  men  who  would  be  rejected  by  all  sorts  of  socie- 
ties, because  really  they  are  ill  at  the  time  or  display  symptoms  of 
illness  and  therefore  are  quite  uninsurable,  or  they  may  be  drunk- 
ards. Those  are  the  sort  of  reasons  for  which  a  society  now 
excludes  them.  That  must  necessarily  make  it  impossible  for  us 
to  pay  the  same  benefits  to  the  Post  Ofiice  Contributors  as  would 
be  paid  to  the  men  who  are  in  the  friendly  societies,  because  they 
contain  pretty  much  all  the  bad  lives.  It  will  be  largely  a  temporary 
difficulty  and  a  dwindling  one,  for  the  simple  reason  that  in  future 
men  will  be  taken  on  at  the  age  of  sixteen,  and  at  that  age  the 
vast  majority  of  people  have  not  developed  any  kind  of  disease. 
Therefore  it  will  dwindle  almost  to  nothing  in  the  future,  and  this 
difficulty  is  purely  temporary.  It  will  be  a  body  of  people  who  are 
not  a  very  good  insurable  proposition.   .  .  . 

I  now  come  to  the  finance  of  the  scheme.  In  the  first  year  the 
sums  paid  by  all  classes  of  contributors  will  amount  to  nearly 
;^2 0,000,000,  of  which  employers  will  contribute  nearly  ^9,000,- 
000,  and  the  employees,  ^11 ,000,000.  The  expenditure  on  benefits 
and  administration  will,  in  consequence  of  the  waiting  periods,  be 
only  ;^7,ooo,ooo  in  191 2-13,  but  will  have  risen  to  ^20,000,000 
in  19 1 5-16,  when  the  additional  benefits  begin  to  be  granted.  By 
1922-23  the  State  contribution  will  also  have  risen.  In  the  first 
year  there  will  be  no  charge,  because  the  Act  does  not  come  into 
operation  until  May   i   next  year.    There  must  be  time  to  make 


530  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

arrangements.  There  will  be  only  a  charge  for  the  necessary 
expenses  of  making  preparation.  But  in  19 12-13  the  charge  on 
the  State  will  be  ^1,742,000;  in  1913-14,  ^3,359,000;  and  in 
1915-16  —  a  full  year  —  ;!^4,563,ooo.  That  is  the  expense,  as 
far  as  the  State  and  the  contributors  are  concerned,  of  that  part 
of  the  scheme. 

I  will  now  briefly  outline  the  unemployment  insurance.  My  ex- 
planation will  be  considerably  curtailed,  owing  to  the  fact  that  the 
Home  Secretary  [Mr.  Winston  Churchill]  very  fully  explained  ^  to 
the  House  year  before  last  the  principles  upon  which  the  Govern- 
ment intended  to  proceed.  The  scheme  only  applies  to  one-sixth 
of  the  industrial  population.  We  propose  to  apply  it  only  to  the 
precarious  trades,  which  are  liable  to  very  considerable  fluctuations. 
The  benefit  will  be  of  a  very  simple  character ;  it  is  purely  a  weekly 
allowance.  The  machinery  is  already  set  up  ;  therefore  it  will  not 
be  necessary  to  explain  that.  The  machinery  will  be  the  Labour 
Exchanges  and  the  existing  unions  which  deal  with  unemployment. 
I  will  not  say  anything  about  the  suffering  caused  by  unemploy- 
ment. AH  I  will  say  is  that,  whoever  is  to  blame  for  these  great 
fluctuations  in  trade,  the  workman  is  the  least  to  blame.  He  does 
not  guide  or  gear  the  machine  of  commerce  and  industry ;  the 
direction  and  speed  is  left  almost  entirely  to  others.  Therefore,  he 
is  not  responsible,  although  he  bears  almost  all  the  real  privation. 
I  think  it  is  about  time  we  did  something  in  this  matter,  because 
it  is  not  something  which  has  happened  once  or  twice,  but  some- 
thing that  comes  regularly  every  so  many  years.  We  know  it  will 
come,  and  know  that  distress  will  come  with  it ;  therefore,  we  ought 
to  take  some  means  to  alleviate  the  misery  caused  by  phenomena 
which  we  can  reckon  on  almost  with  certainty  within  a  year  or 
two  of  its  advent. 

No  real  effort  has  been  made  except  by  the  trades  unions. 
That,  of  course,  is  a  purely  voluntary  matter,  and  the  burden  is  a 
very  heavy  one.    It  only  applies,  in  their  case,  to  very  few  trades, 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  199. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  53  I 

and  I  think  to  only  about  14,000,000  workmen  altogether.  The 
others  cannot  afford  it.  Other  trades  have  attempted  it,  but  have 
laid  it  down  because  they  could  not  afford  the  expense.  On  the 
Continent  many  efforts  have  been  made,  mostly  failures,  because 
they  all  were  on  the  voluntary  principle.  In  Cologne  there  was  a 
great  effort.  It  ended  in  about  1800  people  being  insured  out  of 
a  population  of  200,000  or  300,000.  There  it  meant  people  who 
knew  they  would  be  out  of  work,  and  who  insured  against  almost 
certain  unemployment  in  the  winter.  That  is  very  little  good.  I 
came  back,  after  examining  some  of  these  schemes,  with  the  con- 
viction that  you  must  have,  at  any  rate,  three  or  four  conditions. 
You  must  have  a  trade  basis,  to  begin  with.  A  municipal  basis  will 
not  do ;  it  must  be  a  trade  basis,  because  the  fluctuations  are  ac- 
cording to  trades.  You  must  start  with  the  more  precarious  trades. 
The  scheme  must  be  compulsory.  I  also  came  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  the  workmen's  unsupported  efforts  are  quite  useless. 
These  are  the  principles  we  have  incorporated  in  our  Bill.  We 
have  started,  first  of  all,  by  taking  two  groups  of  trades,  and  we 
propose  to  organise  them  individually  —  the  engineering  group  and 
the  building  group.  They  include  building,  construction  of  works, 
shipbuilding,  mechanical  engineering,  and  the  construction  of  vehi- 
cles. These  are  the  trades  in  which  you  have  the  most  serious 
fluctuations  —  I  think  for  a  very  good  reason.  The  depression 
seems  to  fall  more  heavily  on  these  trades  ;  it  seems  to  concentrate 
upon  them,  because  they  produce  the  permanent  instruments  of 
industry.  We  propose  that  in  these  trades  a  fund  shall  be  raised 
for  the  purpose  of  paying  an  unemployment  distress  allowance. 

I  ought  to  say  here  that  you  have  not  the  same  basis  for  actua- 
rial calculation  that  you  have  in  reference  to  sickness.  It  is  very 
necessary  to  warn,  not  merely  the  House,  but  rather  more  espe- 
cially the  workmen  upon  this  point.  You  cannot  say.  with  the 
almost  certainty  that  you  can  in  sickness  that  a  certain  fund  will 
produce  such  and  such  benefits.  In  the  case  of  sickness  you  have 
nearly  one  hundred  years'  experience  behind  you,  and  you  have 


532  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  facts  with  regard  to  sickness  and  death.  You  have  not  got 
the  facts  with  regard  to  unemployment,  and  the  question  is  very 
difficult.  All  we  know  is  that  in  certain  branches  of  trade  unem- 
ployment is  prevalent  and  appalling.  Some  trades  meet  it  by  short 
time,  but  in  other  trades  you  cannot  do  that.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
in  the  building  trade  you  may  get  men  working  overtime  in  one 
place  at  the  very  time  2  o  per  cent  of  the  workmen  are  out  of  work 
in  another. 

We  propose  that  the  workmen  should  pay  2^d.  per  week  and 
the  employer  2id.^  and  that  the  State  should  take  upon  itself  one- 
fourth  of  the  total  income.  We  propose  that  there  should  be  an 
abatement  to  those  employers  who  choose  to  pay  for  their  work 
by  the  year.  I  will  show  the  extent  of  that  abatement ;  it  is  very 
considerable.  If  you  take  the  two  contributions  of  employers  and 
workmen  at  2^d.,  they  come  to  21s.  8d.  per  annum;  we  propose 
that  the  employer  who  will  undertake  to  insure  a  workman  for  the 
whole  of  a  year  can  do  so  for  i5d.  He  will  get  the  whole  benefit 
of  the  reduction.  It  is  proposed  that  the  workman  shall  pay  the 
full  2^d.,  but  that  the  employer  should  get  the  whole  benefit  of  the 
abatement.  It  seems  a  very  serious  abatement.  It  is  practically 
telling  him  that  he  can  take  one-half  if  he  undertakes  to  insure 
the  workman  for  a  year  at  a  time.  It  is  an  inducement  to  him  to 
give  regular  employment ;  it  is  a  discouragement  of  casual  labour  ; 
it  is  a  reward  to  the  employer  who  keeps  his  workmen  for  a  whole 
year.  It  is  a  very  heavy  one,  but  I  think  it  is  worth  while.  That 
is  the  only  exception  made  by  the  employer. 

We  propose,  by  way  of  benefits,  to  give  in  the  engineering 
trade  7s.  per  week  unemployed  pay,  and  in  the  building  trade  6s., 
for  a  maximum  of  fifteen  weeks.  The  number  of  weeks  is  limited 
to  fifteen,  because,  I  again  say  here,  there  is  no  basis  of  actuarial 
calculation,  and  you  will  have  to  watch  the  thing.  Now  you  will 
have  a  huge  distress  fund,  to  which  the  employers  will  contribute 
very  nearly  ^1,000,000  and  the  State,  ^700,000  or  ^800,000  for 
the  purpose  of  relieving  the  distress,  and  to  enable  the  workmen 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  533 

to  insure  where  otherwise  they  could  not  do  it.  But  you  cannot 
guarantee  that  it  will  work  out  at  these  figures.  All  we  can  say, 
having  consulted  the  best  actuaries  at  our  disposal,  is  that  we  are 
firmly  convinced  that  the  fund  will  work  out  in  this  way.  What 
will  happen  ?  The  workman  who  is  out  of  work  will  go  to  the 
Labour  Exchange.  We  want  someone  there  to  check  him,  so  that 
you  will  not  have  a  man  who  is  not  genuinely  unemployed  getting 
unemployed  pay.  Therefore  you  have  to  do  this  through  the  Labour 
Exchanges.  The  man  will  take  his  card  and  they  will  offer  him  a 
job.  If  he  refuses  a  job,  then  comes  the  question.  Who  will  decide 
whether  he  is  unemployed  or  not  ?  We  have  appointed  an  impar- 
tial court  of  referees  to  decide  this  ;  we  cannot  leave  it  to  the  Labour 
Exchanges  entirely,  or  to  the  workmen,  to  decide  whether  the  man 
is  to  take  a  job  or  the  7  s.  unemployed  benefit.  There  will  be  no 
payment  for  a  workman  dismissed  through  his  own  misconduct. 
There  will  be  no  payment  under  this  scheme  where  there  is  unem- 
ployment by  reason  of  strikes  or  lockouts,  because  this  scheme 
has  absolutely  nothing  to  do  with  them.  It  is  purely  a  relief  scheme 
for  unemployment  which  is  due  to  fluctuations  of  trade. 

I  now  take  the  trade  unions  which  insure  themselves  against 
unemployment.  We  propose  in  that  case  that  they  should  reap  the 
benefit,  but  we  cannot  possibly  hand  over  State  funds  —  certainly 
not  employers'  funds  —  to  an  organisation,  the  object  of  which,  in 
the  main,  is  to  fight  out  questions  of  wages  and  conditions  of 
labour  with  the  employers.  What  we  propose  is  this,  that  the 
trade  union  shall  pay  its  unemployed  benefit  to  the  men  and 
claim  from  the  fund  repayment  in  respect  to  the  amount  which 
the  men  would  have  been  entitled  to  draw  had  they  gone  direct  to 
the  Labour  Exchanges.  The  State  in  effect  allows  trade  unions  to 
spend  this  money,  and  at  the  same  time  it  protects  against  the 
unfairness  of  subsidising  what,  after  all,  is  a  war-chest,  —  as  the 
trade  unions  admit.   .   .   . 

If  any  other  trade  wishes  to  come  in,  they  are  to  have,  what  I 
think  they  call  in  the  Court  of  Chancery,  "  liberty  to  apply."    If 


534  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

they  make  out  their  case  and  are  prepared  to  make  their  contribu- 
tion, it  will  be  possible  to  include  them  in  our  scheme.  But  for  the 
moment  we  propose  to  begin  the  experiment  with  these  trades, 
which  are  the  very  worst  trades  from  the  point  of  view  of  unem- 
ployment. This  scheme  will  apply  to  over  2,400,000  workmen.  The 
contributions  of  the  workmen  will  be  ^1,100,000.  The  contribu- 
tions of  the  employers  will  be  ;^9oo,ooo.    The  cost  to  the  State  — 

Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain  :  But  you  said  the  contributions 
from  the  workmen  and  the  employers  are  to  be  the  same. 

Mr.  Lloyd  George:  I  thought  I  had  made  it  quite  clear  that 
there  is  a  very  considerable  abatement  to  the  employer.  It  is  equiv- 
alent to  ;^2  00,000  on  the  whole  scheme  to  the  employers  if  they 
undertake  the  responsibility  of  insuring  the  whole  of  their  work- 
men by  the  year.  The  cost  to  the  State  will  be  approximately 
£  J  K,  0,000  a  year.  The  expenditure  will  undoubtedly  fluctuate  with 
the  state  of  trade,  and  a  fund  will  therefore  have  to  be  created  for 
the  purpose  of  dealing  with  times  of  very  great  distress.  That  is 
the  position  as  far  as  both  of  these  branches  are  concerned.  The 
total  sum  to  be  raised  in  the  first  year  is  ;^24,5oo,ooo,  of  which 
the  State  will  contribute  ^2,500,000.  By  the  fourth  year  the 
State's  contribution  will  have  risen  to  nearly  ^5,500,000.  That  is 
the  finance  of  the  scheme. 

I  have  explained  to  the  House  as  best  I  could  this  great  matter, 
and  I  thank  Members  for  the  courtesy  with  which  they  have  lis- 
tened to  me.  I  have  explained  as  best  I  could  the  details  of  our 
scheme  —  the  system  of  contributions  and  of  benefits  and  the 
machinery  whereby  something  like  15,000,000  people  will  be  in- 
sured, at  any  rate  against  the  acute  distress  which  now  darkens 
the  homes  of  the  workmen  wherever  there  is  sickness  and  unem- 
ployment. I  do  not  pretend  that  this  is  a  complete  remedy.  Before 
you  get  a  complete  remedy  for  these  evils  you  will  have  to  cut  in 
deeper.  But  I  think  it  is  partly  a  remedy.  I  think  it  does  more. 
It  lays  bare  a  good  many  of  those  social  evils,  and  forces  the  State, 
as  a  State,  to  pay  attention  to  them. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  535 

Meantime  till  the  advent  of  complete  remedy,  this  scheme  does 
alleviate  an  immense  mass  of  human  suffering,  and  I  am  going  to 
appeal,  not  merely  to  those  who  support  the  Government  in  this 
House,  but  to  the  House  as  a  whole,  to  the  men  of  all  parties,  to 
assist  us.  I  can  honestly  say  that  I  have  endeavoured  to  eliminate 
from  the  scheme  any  matter  which  would  cause  legitimate  offence 
to  the  reasonable  susceptibilities  of  any  party  in  the  House.  I  feel 
that  otherwise  I  would  have  no  right  to  appeal,  not  only  for  sup- 
port, but  for  co-operation.  I  appeal  to  the  House  of  Commons  to 
help  the  Government  not  merely  to  carry  this  Bill  through,  but  to 
fashion  it ;  to  strengthen  it  where  it  is  weak,  to  improve  it  where 
it  is  faulty.  I  am  sure  if  this  is  done  we  shall  have  achieved  some- 
thing which  will  be  worthy  of  our  labours. 

Here  we  are  in  the  year  of  the  crowning  of  the  King.  We  have 
men  from  all  parts  of  this  great  Empire  coming  not  merely  to 
celebrate  the  present  splendour  of  the  Empire,  but  also  to  take 
counsel  together  as  to  the  best  means  of  promoting  its  future  wel- 
fare. I  think  that  now  would  be  a  very  opportune  moment  for  us 
in  the  Homeland  to  carry  through  a  measure  that  will  relieve  untold 
misery  in  myriads  of  homes  —  misery  that  is  undeserved  ;  that  will 
help  to  prevent  a  good  deal  of  wretchedness,  and  which  will  arm 
the  nation  to  fight  until  it  conquers  "  the  pestilence  that  walketh  in 
darkness,  and  the  destruction  that  wasteth  at  noonday." 


Extract  8^ 

IRISH    SUrrORT   OF  THE  NATIONAL  INSURANCE  BILL 

(J//'.  JoJiii  Re(i)iw)id^  Connnoiis,  May  ^,  tqii) 

Mr.  Redmond  ^ :  .  .  I  would  like  to  say  that  there  are  no  men 
in  this  House  who  for  the  last  thirty  years  have  more  consistently 
supported  every  effort  which  has  been  made  by  any  party  in  this 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  25,  col.  652. 


536  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

House  to  redress  the  balance  which  has  for  so  long  been  against 
the  poor  in  our  modern  civilisation.  No  hon.  Members  have  more 
consistently  supported  all  measures  of  that  kind  than  the  Irish 
Members.  I  entirely  agree  with  the  opening  words  of  the  right 
hon.  Gentleman  the  Member  for  East  Worcestershire  [Mr.  Austen 
Chamberlain].  I  think  it  would  be  impossible,  and,  indeed,  it  would 
be  a  bad  compliment  to  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  for  any 
one  to  attempt  to  deliver  anything  like  a  considered  opinion  with 
reference  to  this  measure  at  the  present  moment.  All  one  can  do 
is  to  take  a  view  of  the  general  aspect  of  it.  It  is  on  the  face  of 
it  a  great  and  comprehensive  measure ;  it  must  be  judged  very 
largely  after  an  examination  of  its  details.  \\'ith  the  objects  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman  has  in  view  every  portion  of  the  House 
must  sympathise.  So  far  as  we  in  Ireland  are  concerned,  we  have 
special  reason  to  sympathise  with  objects  of  this  kind.  Ireland  is 
a  poor  country.  In  Ireland  there  are  more  of  the  poor  and  of  the 
very  poor  than  in  any  other  portion  of  the  United  Kingdom.  There- 
fore Ireland  stands  in  a  special  degree  to  benefit  by  measures  of 
this  kind,  if  only  they  are  so  constructed  and  adapted  as  to  suit 
the  peculiar  circumstances  and  conditions  of  Ireland.  .  .  . 


Extract  86 

DEFENCE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   INSURANCE  BILL 

(J//'.  Sydney  Buxton^  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  Commons, 
May  24,  igii) 

Mr.  Buxton  ^ :  .  .  .  The  Bill,  apparently,  is  a  somewhat  com- 
plex Bill ;  but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  principles  involved  are  simple. 
The  idea  on  which  it  is  based  is  that  under  existing  conditions  the 
whole  burden  of  sickness,  invalidity,  and  unemployment  over  which 
the  workingman  has  no  control,  falls  directly  with  crushing  force 

1  Parliamentar)'  Debates,  Commons,  Fifth  Series,  vol.  26,  col.  270  sqq. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  537 

on  the  individual,  whether  he  'be  provident  or  improvident,  and  I 
think  the  House  is  generally  agreed  that  it  is  time  that  the  employer 
and  the  State  should  enter  into  partnership  with  the  workingman 
in  order  as  far  as  possible  to  mitigate  the  severity  of  the  burden 
which  falls  upon  him.  The  principle  on  which  these  two  schemes 
is  based  is  that  the  burden  of  insurance  against  sickness  and  un- 
employment should  be  shared  by  workmen,  employers,  and  the 
State.  The  system  must  be  contributory  and  compulsory,  and  it 
should  not,  as  far  as  can  be  avoided,  interfere  with  existing  volun- 
tary machinery.  It  should  also  aid  as  far  as  it  can  towards  the 
diminution  and  prevention  of  sickness  and  unemployment  as  well 
as  towards  their  alleviation.  It  is  important  also  that  both  sections 
of  the  Bill  should  bring  into  touch  and  into  partnership  the  various 
interests  concerned,  so  that  they  may  have  a  direct  interest  in  the 
efficient  carrying  out  of  this  scheme. 

The  question  is  whether  a  scheme  of  insurance  against  invalidity 
and  unemployment  is  a  feasible  one.  The  principle  of  the  insur- 
ance of  late  years  has  enormously  increased.  You  can  insure  prac- 
tically against  anything.  I  believe  there  were  insurances  given 
against  the  effects  of  the  Budget  of  my  right  hon.  Friend  ^  a  year 
or  two  ago.  I  belieVe  you  can  now  get  an  insurance  against  the 
House  of  Lords  throwing  out  the  Veto  Bill,  though  what  premium 
is  charged  at  the  present  moment  I  have  been  unable  to  ascertain. 
The  two  parts  of  the  scheme  —  the  invalidity  part  and  the  unem- 
ployment part  —  are  practically  interdependent,  though  in  some 
respects  they  are  naturally  worked  differently.  The  scheme  is  a 
large  one,  and,  with  the  permission  of  the  House,  I  shall  desire  to 
confine  myself  largely  to  the  consideration  of  the  second  part  of 
the  Bill. 

I  make  this  personal  observation.  I  do  not  desire,  in  moving  the 
second  reading  of  the  Bill,  especially  in  regard  to  Part  II,  to  claim 
its  parentage.  The  first  idea  was  that  of  my  right  hon.  Friend 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  [Mr.  David  Lloyd  George].   The 

1  The  Lloyd  George  Budget.    Cf.  supra,  ch.  viii. 


538  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

details  were  carefully  worked  out  by  my  right  hon.  Friend  the  Home 
Secretary  [Mr.  Winston  Churchill],  assisted,  as  I  am  sure  he  will 
be  the  first  to  agree,  by  the  very  able  staff  which  the  country  for- 
tunately possesses  at  the  Board  of  Trade,  and  I  know  that  one  of 
his  principal  regrets  when  he  was  leaving  the  Board  of  Trade  was 
that  he  had  to  leave  it  before  he  had  been  able  to  bring  this  par- 
ticular proposal  to  fruition.  I  took  it  over  at  the  Board  of  Trade, 
and  with  the  assistance  of  my  advisers  I  hope  I  have  done  some- 
thing to  improve  the  Bill.  It  is  now  presented  to  the  House,  as 
we  believe,  as  a  workable  and  water-tight  proposal.  I  can  say  for 
myself  that,  although  I  am  only  the  foster-parent,  I  have  a  pro- 
found interest  in  this  question,  and  a  profound  belief  that  the 
proposals  we  are  making  will  do  something  towards  the  solution 
of  the  question. 

The  point  is,  Will  this  scheme  actually  carry  out  the  object  we 
have  in  view  ?  We  believe  it  will.  We  believe,  further,  that  it  will 
not  only  prove  a  palliative,  but,  by  the  various  provisions  of  the 
Bill,  especially  in' connection  with  our  Labour  Exchanges,^  which 
are,  after  all,  the  corollary  of  the  Unemployed  Bill,  we  shall  be  able 
to  do  something,  by  organising  in  various  ways,  towards  the  steady- 
ing of  labour  and  the  regularity  of  employmenl;. 

Let  me  deal  with  some  of  the  criticisms  which  have  been  directed 
against  the  Bill  since  it  came  before  the  country.  There  are  two 
points  of  great  importance  —  one  is  a  criticism,  the  other  a  sug- 
gestion. Both  are  of  serious  moment  to  the  life  of  the  Bill.  The 
criticism  is  this  —  that  the  unemployment  part  of  the  Bill  is  a  haz- 
ardous experiment.  The  suggestion  is  that  it  is  premature,  and  that 
it  ought  to  be  divided  from  the  other  part  of  the  Bill  and  taken 
at  a  later  stage.  .   .  . 

It  was  assumed  on  the  first  reading,  I  think,  that  we  had  no 
substantial  available  data  on  which  we  could  found  our  proposals ; 
but  the  ver}'  able  report  of  the  very  able  actuary,  Mr.  Ackland,  to 
whom  the  matter  was  referred,  has,  I  think,  dispelled  the  illusion, 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  213. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  539 

and  shows  that  we  have  sufficient  information  and  that  the  safe- 
guards which  we  present  in  the  Bill  are  sufficient  to  enable  us  to 
offer  the  proposal  as  an  acceptable  one  to  the  House  of  Commons. 
May  I  point  out  this,  that  the  postponement  of  the  proposals  would 
give  us  no  further  information  than  we  have  at  the  present  time. 
Such  data  as  we  have,  such  bases  for  calculation  as  we  have  at  the 
present  moment,  will  speedily  increase ;  and  we  hope  if  the  Bill  is 
passed,  and  these  insurance  proposals  are  introduced  and  applied  to 
certain  trades,  before  long  we  shall  have  better  experience  in  order, 
if  necessary,  to  extend  the  system  still  further.  I  would  point  out, 
and  I  think  it  is  an  important  point,  that  the  data  on  which  we 
are  acting  —  the  data  of  our  actuary  on  which  he  proceeded  —  are 
based  on  the  actual  experience  for  many  years  past  of  the  great 
trade  unions,  including  in  insured  trades  something  like  300,000 
persons,  and  the  data  seem  to  me  to  be  very  sound,  direct  data, 
founded  entirely  on  the  payment  of  unemployed  benefits.   .   .   . 

Then  there  is  a  further  argument,  perhaps  of  a  rather  more  spe- 
cious character,  which  has  been  raised  on  the  first  reading  and 
since.  It  is  that  we  should  not  carry  out  the  compulsory  part  of 
this  scheme,  but  make  a  beginning  with  voluntary  insurance  alone. 
That  also,  I  hope,  will  be  strenuously  resisted  by  the  House,  because 
without  the  compulsory  part  we  cannot  make  a  real  effort  —  we 
cannot  carry  out  a  comprehensive  system  of  National  Insurance 
against  unemployment.  All  the  experience  abroad  goes  to  show 
that  a  purely  voluntary  scheme  will  not  really  be  of  an  effective 
character.  It  naturally  includes  bad  risks,  and  almost  from  the  be- 
ginning it  is  bound  to  be  more  or  less  financially  unsound.  The  only 
scheme  —  a  scheme  which  has  some  supporters,  and  which  no 
doubt  in  itself  has  had  some  success  —  is  what  is  called  the  Ghent 
system.  That  scheme  we  have  alread}-  adopted  in  our  Bill  as  re- 
gards the  voluntary  part  of  it,  but,  as  the  sole  contribution  of  this 
great  question,  it  is  totally  and  wholly  ineffective.  The  Ghent  sys- 
tem is  this :  it  is  a  simple  and  direct  contribution  of  recognised 
associations,  which  in  these  cases  n:eans  trade  unions  alone,  and  of 


540  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

a  State  contribution  to  such  unemployment  benefits  as  they  give. 
We  desire  to  encourage  not  only  those  who  are  at  present  able 
to  insure  for  themselves,  but  we  are  even  more  desirous  by  com- 
pulsion to  secure  the  provision  of  unemployed  benefits  for  those 
who  for  any  reason  at  present  are  unable  or  unwilling  to  insure 
themselves.  .  .  . 

The  scheme  is  obviously  confined  to  certain  classes  of  the  popu- 
lation, and  it  would  certainly  be  fatal  to  any  scheme  of  insurance 
to  say  that  it  must  not  be  applied  to  limited  cases.  That  has  never 
deterred  us  from  attempting  any  social  reform  or  any  social  legis- 
lation which,  in  the  first  instance,  applied  to  a  limited  class.  I 
contend,  on  the  other  hand,  that  we  are  entitled  —  and  we  are 
doing  it  every  day  —  to  utilise  the  resources  of  the  community  for 
the  purpose  of  instituting  such  reforms,  even  though  of  a  limited 
character,  and  applying  them  only  to  limited  classes.  I  think  we 
can  say  that,  although  in  a  sense  this  contribution  is  to  a  limited 
class  and  a  limited  number,  it  is  really  a  contribution  benefiting  all 
trades  and  all  classes  of  the  community.   .   .   . 

Allegations  have  been  made  in  many  quarters  that  the  scheme 
of  the  Bill  as  a  whole  is  going  to  throw  great  additional  burdens  on 
workmen,  employers,  and  the  State.  That  I  deny  altogether.  In- 
surance against  sickness  and  unemployment  will  involve  no  new 
burden.  The  burden  exists  at  present,  but  in  future  it  will  be  better 
distributed  and  more  easily  and  equitably  borne,  and  more  people 
will  be  benefited  by  this  system  of  insurance.  Take  the  case  of  un- 
employment. At  present  the  burden  appears  in  the  national  ledger 
as  pauperising  Poor  Law  expenditure,  as  systems  of  State  or  mu- 
nicipal doles,  and  as  sudden  emergency  works  which  very  often 
are  a  waste  of  money.  So  far  as  the  provident  workman  is  con- 
cerned, it  is  met  by  the  contribution  to  the  trade  union,  and  where 
he  is  improvident,  it  is  met  by  the  neighborly  assistance  he  receives, 
and  which  is  so  freely  and  ungrudgingly  given  among  the  working 
classes,  and  by  the  costly  realisation  of  his  belongings,  costly  credit, 
and  costly  arrears.    In  connection  with  these  operations,  the  man 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  54 1 

is  subjected  both  mentally  and  physically  to  the  suffering  which  the 
unemployment  brings  in  its  train.  I  think  it  will  stand  to  reason 
that  it  must  be  infinitely  better  to  have  permanent  machinery  to 
anticipate  the  "  rainy  day  "  and  to  distribute  the  money  more  equi- 
tably over  various  interests  and  more  uniformly  over  the  period.  I 
think  one  can  safely  assert  that  the  burden,  far  from  being  greater, 
would  really  be  less  than  before. 

There  is  one  other  objection  to  the  scheme  upon  which  the  House 
will  allow  me  to  say  a  word.  We  are  told  that  we  ought  to  differ- 
entiate —  this  is  an  important  point  —  our  contributions  and  bene- 
fits according  to  the  risks  of  a  trade  as  a  whole,  and  that  we  ought 
to  distinguish  more  between  trade  and  trade,  and  even  distinguish 
between  various  sections  of  a  trade.  I  do  not  think  that  will  receive 
the  support  of  my  hon.  Friends  below  the  gangway.  Trade  union- 
ism has  always  preached  the  solidarity  of  labour,  and  that,  so  far 
as  it  goes,  the  regular  man  and  the  irregular  man  should  be  put 
together.  We  are  providing  in  this  Bill  for  certain  differentiation, 
and  as  our  experience  extends  we  may  be  able  to  provide  that  still 
further,  but  I  think,  at  all  events,  in  the  first  instance,  it  is  very 
important  that  we  should,  as  far  as  possible,  take  what  is  called 
the  flat  rate  and  apply  it  to  engineering  and  shipbuilding  and  to 
the  other  trades  in  the  building  construction  group,  and  see  how 
it  will  work  out,  and  with  what  justice,  to  the  various  interests 
concerned.  .  .  . 

I  wish  to  refer  to  another  point  upon  which  I  think  there  has 
been  on  the  part  of  my  hon.  Friends  below  the  gangway  consider- 
able apprehension,  and  that  is  in  regard  to  the  effect  this  Bill  may 
have  upon  trade  unions  —  whether  the  provisions  are  drafted  suf- 
ficiently vide  to  enable  a  trade  union  to  become  and  remain  an 
approved  society  without  necessitating  any  effective  alteration  in  its 
practice,  or  in  its  ordinary  functions  as  a  trade  union.  I  can  well 
understand  the  anxiety  that  all  trade  union  men  have  if  they  feel 
that  the  real  effect  of  this  Bill  is  going  to  undermine  or  destroy  trade 
unions.    These  great  organisations,  built  up  during  many  years  in 


542  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  past,  and  whose  position  has  become  so  strong,  might  very  well 
feel  that  any  proposal  whereby  their  general  position  was  in  any 
way  weakened  or  undermined  would  be  indefensible,  and  that  no 
such  Bill  ought  to  be  put  on  the  Statute  Book.  I  am  one  of  those 
—  I  have  always  said  so  publicly — -who  believe,  and  I  believe  it 
is  the  opinion  of  the  House  now,  that  it  is  not  only  in  the  interest 
of  labour  itself,  but  in  the  interest  of  employers  as  well,  that  these 
trade  unions  should  be  strong,  representative,  and  independent,  and 
I  can  assure  my  hon.  Friends  and  the  House  generally  that  nothing 
is  further  from  the  object  and  desire  of  the  framers  of  the  Bill  than 
that  when  it  becomes  an  Act  it  should  be  used  as  a  disruptive  force 
against  any  trade  union.   .   .   . 

I  have  endeavoured  to  deal  with  the  chief  criticism,  most  of 
which  has  been  directed  against  Part  H,  and  some  of  which  has 
been  directed  against  Part  I  of  the  Bill.  There  is  just  one  other 
point  which  I  may  refer  to  incidentally.  I  have  seen  the  scheme 
criticised  with  reference  to  its  being  too  bureaucratic.  We  are, 
after  all,  going  to  deal  with  it  through  the  Labour  Exchanges,  and 
the  voluntary  associations  through  the  combination,  and  we  hope 
co-operation,  by  means  of  joint  committees  of  representative  em- 
ployers and  workmen.  If  it  can  be  shown  in  any  way  that  those 
panels  of  referees  can  be  made  more  representative  than  those 
proposed  by  this  Bill,  we  shall  very  much  welcome  any  suggestions 
that  can  be  made ;  but  I  can  assure  the  Hous'e  that  our  sole  desire 
is  to  put  the  system,  as  far  as  we  can,  on  a  representative  basis.  .  .  . 

This  is  our  proposal,  and  this  is  our  contribution  to  social  reform. 
I  am  sure  that  my  right  hon.  Friend,  and  certainly  I,  would  be  the 
last  to  claim  that  in  any  sense  this  is  a  final  solution  of  the  problem 
of  sickness  or  unemployment,  but  I  think  it  has  this  great  merit, 
that  while  it  is  a  considerable  step  forward  in  the  direction  which 
we  all  desire  to  follow,  it  is  not  only  no  obstacle  to,  but  I  think  it  is 
an  avenue  towards,  the  extension  of  various  other  systems,  also  in 
the  same  direction.  We  have  founded  it,  as  we  believe,  on  a  busi- 
ness basis  and  on  sound  actuarial  calculations,  and  we  offci"  it  to 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  543 

the  House  as  a  great  and  beneficent  step  forward,  which,  if  the 
House  accepts  it,  will  do  much  to  achieve  that  which  we  all  desire 
—  the  improvement  of  the  social  condition  of  the  working  classes. 


Extract  Sy 

LESSONS  FROM  GERMAN  EXPERIENCE 

(Sir  Riifiis  Isaacs,  Aitoniey-Gcncral,  Commons,  May  2^,  IQH) 

Sir  Rufus  Isaacs  ^ :  .  .  .  In  the  framing  of  this  measure  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  and  those  who  have  been  privileged 
to  take  part  at  all  in  the  discussion  of  the  details  of  this  measure 
have  had  the  incalculable  advantage  of  the  experience  of  the 
German  Empire  in  relation  to  this  compulsory  insurance.  Germany 
has  gradually  built  up  a  system  which  by  common  consent  is  of  a 
most  beneficent  character  and  is  working  to  the  advantage  not  only 
of  the  employer,  but  also  of  the  employed.  The  White  Paper  which 
has  been  circulated  quite  recently  contains  the  opinions  of  a  number 
of  German  employers  which  really  are  most  valuable  in  considering 
what  we  can  anticipate  as  the  probable  result  of  this  measure, 
certainly  upon  employers.  I  am  not  going  to  attempt  to  read  them 
or  quote  them  to  this  House,  but  I  will  summarise  them  in  two  or 
three  sentences,  and  I  believe  fairly,  having  regard  to  the  opinions 
therein  expressed.  The  general  opinion  in  Germany  is  that  by 
freeing  the  working  classes  from  anxiety  by  reason  of  sickness, 
infirmity,  and  accidents,  their  conditions  of  life  have  been  materially 
bettered,  and,  from  the  employers'  standpoint,  the  contributions 
they  make  have  proved  an  excellent  investment.  The  insurance 
law  has  tended  to  improve  the  relations  between  the  employer  and 
the  employed,  without  impairing  the  independence  of  the  workers. 

Indeed,  if  you  study  the  history  of  the  last  twenty-five  years,  the 
period  covered  by  the  insurance  legislation  in  Germany,  it  will  be 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fifth  Scries,  Commons,  vol.  26,  col.  36S  sqq. 


544  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

discovered  that  trade  unions  have  flourished  and  multiplied  exceed- 
ingly in  the  German  Empire,  concurrently  with  the  progress  and 
development  of  this  industrial  legislation.  On  the  other  hand,  so 
satisfied  are  the  employers  with  the  result  of  this  legislation  that  it 
is  roundly  asserted  by  one  prominent  employer,  speaking,  as  he 
believes,  on  behalf  of  the  employers,  or  the  majority  of  the  em- 
ployers in  Germany,  that  they  do  not  desire,  and  indeed  would 
oppose,  the  repeal  of  these  insurance  laws,  which,  nevertheless, 
necessitate  their  making  a  contribution  to  certain  funds  according 
to  the  legislation  of  the  country. 

At  one  time,  as  was  naturally  to  be  expected,  when  this  scheme 
was  launched  or  mooted  in  1881  by  Prince  Bismarck,  there  was 
the  greatest  anxiety  among  German  employers  as  to  what  was  to 
be  expected  as  a  result  of  this  proposal.  It  was  said,  at  first,  that 
it  would  fine  employers,  that  it  would  tend  to  cripple  industry,  and 
that  the  cost  of  production  would  be  increased  without  any  correl- 
ative advantage.  It  was  explained,  according  to  their  views,  that 
these  new  contributions  to  be  made  by  the  German  employer  would 
act  injuriously  upon  the  employers'  interests,  and  that  it  would  con- 
sequently react  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  employed.  But  all 
these  apprehensions  have  long  since  disappeared,  and  Germany 
has  continued  to  develop  under  this  insurance  legislation,  and  at 
the  present  moment  —  it  is  a  curious  coincidence  worthy  of  obser- 
vation that  during  this  very  week,  in  the  German  Reichstag,  there 
has  taken  place  a  debate  on  the  second  reading  of  a  measure  for 
the  consolidation  and  codification  of  the  German  insurance  laws, 
running,  I  believe,  to  something  like  1 5 1 7  paragraphs.  That  is  the 
position  at  the  present  moment. 

Mr.  Booth  :  It  has  been  in  Committee  for  twelve  months. 

Sir  Rufus  Isaacs:  Of  course,  if  there  are  from  1500  to  1700 
clauses,  I  am  not  at  all  surprised  that  it  has  been  in  Committee  for 
twelve  months.  But  we,  during  these  twenty-five  years,  have  not 
progressed  along  the  same  line  as  Germany.  But,  nevertheless,  we 
have  made  great  strides.    \\c  have  ourselves  instituted  workmen's 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  545 

compensation.  We  have  instituted — -it  was  originally  introduced 
by  the  present  Opposition  and  developed  and  extended  by  the 
Liberal  Government  since  igo6  —  old  age  pensions,  which  in  this 
country  are  on  a  non-contributory  basis.  In  Germany,  as  no  doubt 
the  House  is  aware,  it  is  on  a  contributory  basis.  The  difference 
is  that  at  the  present  moment,  for  the  year  1911-12,  the  Govern- 
ment requirement  for  old  age  pensions  is  ^^i  2,840,000,  whereas 
in  Germany  there  will  be  required  of  the  State  as  its  contribution 
to  old  age  pensions,  ^2,575,000,  which  is  a  contribution  to  the 
;^7,5oo,ooo,  which  is  the  total  amount  provided  under  old  age 
pensions  for  the  working  classes  in  Germany.  The  average  old 
age  pension  under  the  scheme  in  Germany  works  out  at  3s.  id. 
per  head.  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  to  know  that,  notwith- 
standing that  there  is  this  scheme  of  old  age  pensions,  very  often 
the  working  classes  who  are  in  receipt  of  old  age  pensions  have 
to  have  recourse  to  the  Poor  Law. 

One  of  the  striking  features  of  the  system  in  Germany  to  which 
I  desire  to  call  attention  is  this,  that  the  compulsory  provisions  for 
sickness  and  disablement  insurance  have  proved  a  stimulus  to  thrift 
in  other  directions.  This  is  confirmatory  to  the  views  which  we  hold. 
It  shows  that  the  habit  of  saving  increases  as  you  make  provision, 
and  as  you  help  by  contributions  either  from  the  employer  or  the 
State,  so  you  induce  the  worker  to  make  further  insurance  for  his 
own  benefit.  He  comes  to  realise  what  is  the  true  advantage  of 
insurance.  He  would,  further,  appreciate  that,  in  the  case  of  sick- 
ness or  temporary  destitution,  when  he  has  either  to  withdraw  or  to 
exhaust  the  fund  which  he  has  managed  to  accumulate  with  great 
difficulty  and  great  trouble  because  of  the  receipt  of  sick  benefit  or 
disablement  in  insurance  benefit,  the  money  which  he  has  managed 
to  save  for  himself  is  still  there  in  the  savings  bank,  still  accumu- 
lating from  day  to  day,  increasing  in  amount,  and  to  which  he  can 
add  his  little  store  from  week  to  week,  and  month  to  month.  The 
desire  to  save  becomes  greater  and  the  appetite  for  it  increases 
daily,  and  consequently,  as  we  believe,  if  we  can  only  manage  in  this 


546  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

country,  by  reason  of  these  contributions,  to  instil  into  our  people 
the  desire  to  save,  not  only  by  those  contributions  that  they  have 
to  make  under  the  Insurance  Law,  but  to  save  in  order  that  they 
may  be  able  to  make  their  own  provision,  to  create  their  own  inde- 
pendence altogether  apart  from  this  scheme,  I  do  believe  that  we 
shall  have  taken  a  most  notable  step  along  the  path  of  progress, 
the  self-respect  and  the  independence  of  the  workpeople  of  this 
country. 

One  further  point  which  we  learn  from  Germany  is  that  the 
curative  and  preventive  effect  of  the  treatment  of  disease  by  means 
of  sanatoria  and  other  institutions,  such  as  convalescent  homes  and 
kindred  establishments,  in  Germany,  have  not  only  succeeded  in 
arresting  the  ravages  of  the  disease  of  consumption,  but  have  helped 
to  prevent  it.   .   .   . 

I  think  that  it  is  a  great  satisfaction  to  us  to  find  that  Germany, 
which  has  been  the  pioneer  in  this  movement,  and  which  has 
hitherto  held  the  leading  place  in  the  world  for  social  legislation 
of  this  kind,  is  itself  much  impressed  with  the  measure  which  has 
been  introduced  by  my  right  hon.  Friend.  I  notice  in  reading  the 
German  newspaper  dealing  with  the  inductory  speech  of  my  right 
hon.  Friend  that  the  German  criticism  of  the  measure  is  that,  ow- 
ing to  its  directness,  its  simplicity,  and  its  comprehensiveness,  it 
will  excel  what  one  German  newspaper,  the  Tageblatt,  calls  the 
"bureaucratic  hotchpotch  of  the  German  insurance  system."  Let 
us  note,  as  we  pass,  the  compliment  that  is  paid  to  my  right  hon. 
Friend  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  In  German  press  articles 
German  experts  are  advised  to  study  the  measure  which  has  been 
introduced  by  my  right  hon.  Friend,  lest  they  should  be  left  behind, 
and,  indeed,  one  German  newspaper  I  happened  to  read,  said  that 
the  introduction  of  this  measure  had  earned  for  my  right  hon. 
Friend  a  statue  in  Westminster  Abbey.  I  hope  the  time  is  long 
distant  before  we  shall  have  to  consider  whether  it  will  be  desirable 
to  erect  a  statue  for  him  in  Westminster  Abbey.   .   .  , 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  547 

Extract  SS 

ATTITUDE  OF  THE  LABOUR  PARTY  TOWARD  NATIONAL 
INSURANCE 

(J/;'.  Ramsay  Macdoiiald^  Couttiioiis^  May  2g,  igi i) 

Mr.  Macdonald  ^ :  By  the  consent  of  everybody  in  this  House, 
I  think  I  may  say  that  the  Bill,  the  second  reading  of  which  we 
are  now  discussing,  is  a  very  unique  Bill.  More  than  that,  the 
debate  which  has  taken  place  upon  it  has  been  a  very  unique 
debate.  If  this  Bill  had  been  introduced  ten  years  ago,  it  would 
not  have  found,  I  think,  a  single  supporter  from  either  of  the  Front 
Benches.  The  point  of  view  which  the  Chancellor  and  the  Govern- 
ment have  taken  is  one  which  is  quite  new,  and  which  marks  a 
fundamental  change  of  public  opinion,  and  the  most  extraordinary 
thing  for  those  who  are  sitting  on  these  Benches  is  to  find  that  that 
point  of  view  is  not  challenged  by  any  section  of  this  House. 

The  old  assumption  upon  which  we  used  to  approach  questions 
of  legislation,  by  which  State  aid  and  State  organisations  were 
regarded  as  something  which  ought  to  be  suspected  by  every  wise 
man,  has  been  thrown  over,  thrown  over  not  only  by  those  who 
sit  in  this  quarter  of  the  House,  but  thrown  over  by  everybody. 
That  is  a  very  substantial  advance,  one  of  those  advances  which 
one  finds  in  public  opinion  happening  periodically  about  once  every 
century,  and  I  think  it  is  an  indication  that  to-day  in  the  times  that 
have  come  upon  us  the  old  political  parties  are  largely  losing  their 
significance ;  and  the  combination  which  has  taken  place,  during 
the  last  week  or  two,  on  both  sides  of  the  House,  to  praise  this 
Bill  and  facilitate  its  passage  is  one  that  is  welcomed,  at  any  rate, 
very  heartily  and  most  sincerely  by  those  who  sit  with  me  here. 

The  purpose  of  this  Bill  is  twofold.  First  of  all,  it  proposes  to 
fill  up  the  gaps  in  the  life  of  the  industrial  classes  that  have  been 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fifth  Series,  Commons,  vol.  26,  col.  718  sqq. 


548  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

only  too  frequent.  What  has  happened  has  been  something  like 
this :  Very  often  when  going  along  long  roads  in  mountainous 
districts,  the  wayfarer  finds  that  a  heavy  fall  or  an  avalanche  of 
snow  has  completely  broken  the  road  which,  up  to  that  point,  had 
been  smooth  and  easy  walking.  Every  now  and  again  the  wage- 
earner  has  come  to  points  like  that  on  his  way ;  sickness,  unem- 
ployment, or  misfortune  of  some  kind  seems  completely  to  have 
smashed  the  road  right  away  in  front  of  him,  and  he  has  been  left 
behind  struggling  for  existence,  severely  handicapped,  and  without 
any  chance  of  using  the  opportunities  which  otherwise  would  be  at 
his  disposal.  For  the  first  time  in  a  clear,  unmistakable,  sympa- 
thetic way  a  Government  has  come  before  the  country  and  has  said 
that  the  repair  of  these  breaches  in  the  way  of  life  is  a  responsibility 
imposed  upon  the  Government,  and  an  Opposition  has  also  offered 
to  say  to  the  Government,  "  We  support  you  in  your  efforts  and 
agree  with  your  general  position." 

The  second  point  of  the  Bill  is  one  which  is  equally  of  impor- 
tance. Its  idea  is  so  to  improve  the  general  public  health  that 
those  gaps  will  be  less  frequent  than  they  have  been.  The  inten- 
tion of  the  Bill  is  not  only  to  repair  gaps  that  have  been  effected, 
but  to  repair  the  road  against  those  avalanches  that  fall  from  time 
to  time. 

I  wish  to  ask  the  indulgence  of  the  House  to  examine  the  Bill  in 
a  more  or  less  general  way  from  those  two  points  of  view.  I  shall 
take  the  public  health  point  of  view  first.  When  one  sits  down  and 
thinks  of  it  seriously,  and  apart  from  one's  own  experience,  it  really 
is  the  most  extraordinary  thing  that  up  to  now  our  doctors  have 
been  paid  for  attending  disease.  The  more  disea.ses,  the  better  it 
has  been  for  the  medical  faculty  of  this  country.  That  is  absurd, 
absolutely  absurd. 

The  whole  medical  service  had  been  so  disorganised  that,  in  so 
far  as  it  has  been  prompted  by  economic  considerations  only,  the 
interest  of  every  doctor  was  to  get  as  many  diseases,  as  much 
illness,  as  he  could  possibly  create  amongst  the  people.    A  doctor 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  549 

attending  a  sick  person  only  drew  fees  when  the  persons  were 
sick.  My  name  might  be  on  my  doctor's  list  of  possible  patients, 
but  so  long  as  I  am  well,  my  doctor  is  making  nothing  out  of  me. 
The  moment  I  become  ill,  then  my  doctor  begins  to  regard  me  in 
the  light  of  an  income.  I  understand  the  protest  was  raised  from  the 
other  side.  I  know  perfectly  well  that  of  no  profession  in  the  whole 
country  is  it  truer  to  say  that  their  economic  interests  have  never 
regulated  their  conduct.  It  has  been  one  of  the  most  encouraging 
and  remarkable  manifestations,  that,  on  account  of  humanitarian 
considerations,  and  on  account  of  the  intellectual  interest  they 
have  taken  in  their  profession,  our  doctors  have  never  allowed 
their  economic  interests  to  dictate  their  relationship  to  the  gen- 
eral public.  But  there  the  facts  remain,  and  until  this  Bill  has  been 
brought  before  the  House  there  has  not  been  any  attempt  to  es- 
tablish a  system  of  social  organisation  which  used  the  doctor  not 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  attending  disease  but  for  the  purpose 
of  eliminating  disease  altogether. 

With  that  general  point  of  view  before  us,  it  becomes  very 
necessary  that  medical  men  under  this  Bill  should  have  the  very 
fairest  treatment.  I  am  not  quite  sure  how  far  the  claims  made  by 
medical  men  up  to  now  are  well  founded.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact 
that  the  medical  faculty,  speaking  of  them  as  a  whole,  feel  them- 
selves injured,  or  possibly  injured,  by  this  Bill.  I  think  they  are 
very  wise  to  take  the  gloomiest  view  of  their  prospects  under  the 
Bill.-  We  ought  not  to  object  to  their  taking  that  point  of  view, 
because  they  know  enough  of  life  to  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
if  they  do  not  take  that  view,  nobody  else  will.  Therefore  I,  for 
one,  do  not  regard  the  doctors  as  being  hostile  to  the  Bill  because 
they  are  putting  in  claims  that  the  scale  of  fees  and  the  financial 
provision  made  for  them  are  not  at  all  adequate.  I  hope  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  will  very  seriously  consider  that 
matter.  .  .  . 

Let  me  take  the  second  point,  which  I  mentioned  first  of  all,  and 
which  is  the  main  purpose  of  the  Bill  —  the  purpose  of  filling  up 


550  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  gaps  in  life  and  mailing  them  less  frequent.  In  that  connection 
I  think  the  House  should  be  very  careful  not  to  use  two  very 
erroneous  expressions  that  have  been  employed  frequently  by  the 
previous  speakers.  The  Bill  proposes,  they  say,  to  make  deductions 
from  wages  and  give  free  medical  attendance.  Both  those  expres- 
sions are  absolutely  wrong,  and  if  the  public  once  gets  it  into  its 
mind  that  these  expressions  adequately  and  accurately  represent 
what  the  Bill  proposes,  enormous  difficulties  will  be  raised  in  con- 
sequence. As  a  matter  of  fact  there  is  no  deduction  from  wages 
at  all.  In  the  proper  sense  of  the  term  "  deduction  "  there  is  no 
deduction  from  wages,  because  sooner  or  later  the  chances  are  that 
everyone  of  us  will  have  to  pay  a  doctor's  bill,  and  what  is  done  by 
this  Bill  is  simply,  instead  of  paying  the  doctor's  bill  in  the  lump  we 
are  asked  to  pay  it  in  instalments.  But  that  is  not  a  deduction 
from  wages.  Accurate  words,  I  think,  would  conduce  to  accurate 
thinking  in  this  respect,  and  would  enable  the  public  to  appreciate 
much  more  than  I  am  afraid  it  now  appreciates  what  is  precisely 
the  effect  of  this  Bill.  Again,  free  medical  attendance  is  not  given 
under  this  Bill.  Why,  one  might  as  well  say  that  if  one  insures 
one's  life,  and  one's  heirs  put  in  a  claim  against  the  insurance  so- 
ciety to  which  one  belonged,  that  this  insurance  society  is  making 
a  free  gift  to  one's  heirs.  As  a  matter  of  fact  that  is  not  the  case  at 
all.  There  is  no  free  medical  attendance  proposed  under  this  Bill. 
It  is  simply  the  application  of  the  method  and  principle  of  insurance 
against  certain  events  which  overtake  most  of  us  during  our  life. 

The  Bill,  if  I  may  say  so  without  being  misunderstood,  is,  after 
all,  superficial ;  it  deals  with  the  problem  of  poverty  when  that 
poverty  has  arisen.  If  we  all  had  ;^2oo  per  year,  and  if  the 
average  income  of  the  working  classes  was  something  like  ;^2  5o 
per  year,  this  Bill  would  be  unnecessary.  It  would  be  necessary 
to  organise  public  health,  it  would  still  be  necessary  to  consider 
the  conditions  under  which  the  individual  lives,  but  so  far  as  in- 
surance is  concerned  of  the  individual  in  respect  to  his  doctor's 
bill  this  Bill  would  not  be  at  all  necessary. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  55  I 

That  being  so,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  must  expect 
that  every  step  he  takes  to  meet  special  hardships  will  have  grave 
danger  of  only  creating  hardships.  Take,  for  instance,  the  cases 
of  those  with  from  9s.  to  15s.  per  week.  It  is  perfectly  evident, 
and  I  do  not  think  anybody  will  dispute  this  proposition,  that  a 
man  or  woman  with  9s.  a  week  as  an  income  has  not  a  sufficiently 
big  income  to  enable  him  or  her  to  live  a  decent  life,  and  certainly 
not  a  sufficiently  big  income  to  justify  the  State  taking  /\.d.  per 
week.  We  all  agree  that  that  is  not  a  disputable  proposition  at  all, 
but  I  am  not  at  all  sure  that  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  is 
able  to  devise  any  exemption  or  any  system  of  gradation  that  will 
not  to  a  certain  extent  have  the  effect  of  stereotyping  the  present 
bad  conditions.  We  must  do  our  very  best  by  careful  consideration 
of  the  economic  circumstances  to  make  these  too  low-paid  forms 
of  labour,  such  a  very  striking  and  rather  common  feature  of 
modern  society  —  we  must  do  our  level  best  not  to  stereotype  them 
by  anything  of  a  humanitarian  character  and  in  the  character  of  a 
concession  which  this  Bill  may  give.   .   .   . 

It  is  unfair  to  ask  the  man  whose  strength  is  below  the  average, 
to  bear  his  own  burdens.  I  do  not  think  anybody  will  dispute  that. 
If  we  proceed  upon  the  insurance  method  and  apply  the  insurance 
principle,  we  must  strike  an  average,  and  that  average  ought  not 
to  be  struck  merely  on  the  workmen  themselves,  but  ought  to  be 
an  average  in  which  other  responsibilities  and  other  interests  than 
those  of  the  workman  can  find  adequate  place.  Moreover,  the 
State  is  going  to  organise  health,  and  health  must  not  be  organised 
at  the  charge  of  the  individual  workman.  Therefore  the  workman's 
contribution  ought  to  be  supplemented  by  other  contributions,  and 
there  we  will  leave  it  for  the  moment. 

What  about  the  employers  ?  I  am  bound  to  say,  from  my  point 
of  view,  and  I  am  trying  to  argue  the  thing  down  from  general 
principles,  it  is  more  difficult  to  impose,  and  to  discover  justification 
for  imposing,  responsibility  upon  the  employer  than  either  upon  the 
workman  or  the  State  in  this  respect.   What  is  the  responsibility  of 


552  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

the  employer  ?  It  is,  first  of  all,  to  provide  good  conditions  for  his 
workmen,  but  that  is  secured  by  legislation.  Then  there  are  em- 
ployers working  especially  dangerous  trades,  and  yet  that  again  is 
secured  by  special  legislation.  .  .  .  The  employer  has  got  a  third 
responsibility,  and  that  is  to  pay  proper  wages.  If  the  employer 
pays  proper  wages,  or,  in  other  words,  if  the  workers'  share  of  the 
national  income  is  adequate,  then  we  do  not  want  charity  and  we 
do  not  want  assistance  at  all.  Therefore  the  employers'  main 
responsibilities  are  to  obey  the  law  and  pay  good  wages.  Still  he 
does  come  in  in  one  way.  If  the  Bill  operates  and  produces  the 
results  which  we  expect  it  will  produce,  then  it  will  undoubtedly 
mean  that  it  will  give  to  the  employer  a  more  and  more  efficient 
body  of  workers  than  he  has  got  now,  and  it  will  enable  him  to  run 
his  machinery  more  efficiently  than  machinery  is  now  being  run. 
It  will  enable  him  to  use  his  capital  more  economically  than  his 
capital  is  being  used  now.  .  .  . 

The  third  partner  is  the  State.  The  State  is  going  to  receive 
enormous  benefits  from  this  Bill ;  rates  are  going  to  be  lowered, 
taxes  are  going  to  be  made  less,  all  sorts  of  public  charges,  neces- 
sary on  account  of  the  low  state  of  vitality  and  bad  state  of  health 
of  a  large  section  of  the  people,  are  going  to  be  eased  if  this  Bill 
is  going  to  do  what  it  is  expected  it  will  do. 

When  you  come  to  apportionment  it  is  quite  impossible  to  trans- 
late into  mathematical  relationship  and  ratio  the  various  benefits  to 
the  workman,  the  employer,  and  the  State  respectively.  But  I  am 
perfectly  certain  of  this  —  that  if  gd.  is  required,  then  4d.  for  the 
workman,  3d.  from  the  employer,  and  3d.  from  the  State  is  not  a 
fair  apportionment.  I  am  perfectly  certain  of  that,  and  that  can- 
not be  justified,  but  we  are  quite  willing  to  accept,  during  the  ex- 
perimental stages  at  any  rate,  an  equal  apportionment  of  3d.,  3d., 
and  3d.  That  is  fair  play,  and  at  all  events,  on  the  face  of  it, 
substantially  it  is  a  nearer  approach  to  fair  play  than  ^d.,  3d.,  and 
2d.  I  think  that  we  shall  have  in  Committee  to  move  Amendments 
which  will  effect  that  redistribution  of  premiums. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  553 

Those  of  us  who  sit  here  must  also  scrutinise  the  Bill  very 
carefully,  very  systematically  I  hope,  but  still  very  carefully,  as  to 
what  the  effect  on  wages  is  going  to  be.  The  prime  consideration 
of  everybody  who  is  concerned  in  raising  the  status  of  the  working 
classes  is  the  amount  of  wages  the  working  class  get.  You  cannot 
get  out  of  that.  We  do  not  want  charity  and  we  do  not  want  doles, 
and  we  do  not  want  Grants-in-Aid,  and  we  do  not  want  relief,  and 
this  is  necessary  at  the  present  moment,  simply  because  things  are 
as  they  are,  and  in  order  to  cure  our  present  evils.  I  do  not  believe 
that  the  trade-union  movement,  the  members  of  the  trade  unions, 
and  the  wage-earners,  as  a  whole,  will  look  twice  at  any  proposal 
that  will  make  it  more  difficult  for  them  than  it  is  now  to  increase 
the  general  wages  of  the  general  group  of  wage-earners  of  the 
country.  .  .  . 

We  must  be  very  careful  about  our  economic  facts.  We  cannot 
carry  out  high  and  dry  economics.  That  is  absurd.  We  are  not  in 
a  vacuum.  We  are  living  under  conditions  which  compel  us  to 
modify  and  change  those  broader  abstract  dogmas  which  in  the 
abstract  are  perfectly  true,  but  which  in  everyday  life  cannot  quite 
be  applied.  I  hope  the  House  when  it  gets  into  Committee,  in 
making  a  departure  from  sound  economics  will  make  that  departure 
as  little  as  the  circumstances  will  allow.  I  feel  perfectly  certain  that 
the  great  mass  of  trade  unionists  in  the  country  will  agree  with  me 
in  that  statement.  It  is  so  important  that  there  should  be  no 
shadow  of  doubt  about  it  that  I  repeat  it.  We  are  not  here  for 
aids  for  wages,  but  we  are  here  for  better  wages.  We  are  here 
to  raise  the  wages,  and  not  to  make  it  easier  for  low-paid  labour 
to  exist  at  all. 

With  this  in  mind  I  should  like  to  draw  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer's  attention  to  the  effect  of  one  of  its  beneficent  provi- 
sions. We  all  understand  why  he  has  provided  in  the  Bill  that 
every  worker  under  twenty-one  years  of  age  shall  pay  the  full 
premium,  but  that  when  the  age  of  twenty-one  is  reached,  the 
graded  scale  is  to  come  into  operation.    Nobody  will  quarrel  with 


554  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

this  intention.  But  what  will  happen  ?  There  are  scores  of  thou- 
sands of  women  in  the  country  employed  at  mechanical  labour. 
One  has  simply  to  go  to  Birmingham  and  see  women  working  in 
front  of  big  punching  presses.  The  only  thing  they  do  is  to  feed 
them  ;  sometimes  they  do  not  even  do  that ;  they  only  watch  cer- 
tain long  carefully  prepared  strips  of  brass  or  iron  going  through 
the  presses.  They  simply  pull  away  baskets  when  they  are  filled 
and  put  empty  baskets  in  their  place.  What  will  happen  with 
regard  to  these  women  ?  Up  to  the  age  of  twenty-one  they  will 
have  to  pay  3d.,  but  when  they  reach  the  age  of  twenty-one  and 
their  3d.  becomes  2d.  or  id.,  and  the  contribution  of  the  employer 
becomes  /\.d.  or  5d.,  they  will  be  discharged.  There  is  no  doubt 
about  that.  I  think  that  must  be  taken  into  account  because  that, 
again,  would  be  an  exceedingly  unfortunate  result  of  this  Bill.  .  .  . 

With  reference  to  the  unemployment  section  of  the  Bill  I  need 
say  very  little.  We  all  admit  that  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer 
has  gone  upon  ground  which  has  not  been  statistically  explored. 
The  very  interesting  actuarial  report  is  admirable  proof  of  that. 
The  experiment  is  going  to  be  carried  out  for  five  years  in  accord- 
ance with  the  provisions  of  the  Bill.  During  that  time  readjust- 
ments are  to  be  made,  and  observations  made  in  regard  to  the 
various  risks,  and  so  on.  I  think  the  House  and  the  Committee 
will  be  very  well  advised  not  to  try  to  make  this  Bill  verbally  per- 
fect. You  cannot  do  it.  We  have  not  got  the  experience  to  do  it. 
It  will  be  far  better  to  let  it  go  through  with  the  certain  admitted 
defects  and  shortcomings  so  that  we  may  not  establish  too  elabo- 
rate a  system  now.  It  is  much  easier  to  change  a  simple  system 
and  make  it  more  perfect  after  we  have  had  the  requisite  experi- 
ence than  to  begin  with  a  very  elaborate  system  and  then  to 
change  it  five  years  from  now.   .   .   . 

I  believe  that  we  all  can  foresee  that  the  tightness  of  time  may 
endanger  this  Bill,  but  I  think  we  can  candidly  confess  to  ourselves 
that  fact  and  approach  this  question  with  the  assumption  that  this 
Bill  cannot  be  made  perfect  because  we  have  not  got  the  material 


NATIONAL   INSURANCE  555 

which  will  make  it  perfect,  that  every  anomaly  cannot  be  elimi- 
nated from  the  Bill,  and  that  it  must  contain  some  injustice  to  some 
section  or  the  other.  If  we  will  begin  with  the  assumption  and 
supplement  that  by  the  other  assumption  that  we  are  producing 
something  that  is  going  to  enable  us  to  construct  tables  from 
experience  which  in  a  few  years  to  come  will  permit  the  House  of 
Commons  to  construct  a  measure  of  insurance  against  sickness, 
invalidity,  and  unemployment  that  will  be  fair,  and  will,  of  course, 
be  constructed  from  top  to  bottom,  we  will  not  allow  this  Bill  to 
be  stifled,  strangled,  or  dropped  because  the  time  is  rather  short. 
With  the  consent,  good-will,  and  co-operation  of  all  sections  of  the 
House,  I  hope,  I  believe,  that  this  Bill  can  be  put  upon  the  Stat- 
ute Book  this  year,  and  this  beneficent  provision  be  brought  into 
operation  about  twelve  months  from  now. 


ATTITUDE  OF  THE  UNIONIST  PARTY  TOWARD  NATIONAL 
INSURANCE 

{Mr.  H.  II'.  Forstcr^  Coininons^  December  6.,  191 1) 

Mr.  Forster  ^ :  I  beg  to  move  to  leave  out  all  the  words  after 
the  word  "  That,"  and  to  insert  instead  thereof  the  words,  "  while 
approving  the  objects  of  national  insurance,  this  House  is  of  opin- 
ion that  under  Part  I  of  the  Bill  public  funds  and  individual  con- 
tributions will  not  be  used  to  the  best  advantage  of  those  most 
closely  affected,  and  that,  as  the  Bill  has  been  neither  adequately 
discussed  in  this  House  nor  fully  explained  to  the  country  and 
would  in  its  present  form  be  unequal  in  its  operation,  steps  'should 
be  taken  to  enable  further  consideration  of  Part  I  to  be  resumed 
next  Session,  and  in  the  meanwhile  to  have  the  draft  regulations 
published."   .   .   . 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fifth  Series,  Commons,  vol.  32,  col.  14 19  sqq. 


556  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

What  is  the  meaning  of  the  Amendment  ?  The  meaning  is  pat- 
ent on  the  face  of  it,  and  any  man  who  reads  the  Amendment  can 
see  precisely  what  it  means.  This  is  the  object  of  it,  that  the  de- 
tailed discussion  of  this  Bill  should  not  now  be  closed.  I  ask  that 
further  opportunity  should  be  given,  both  to  the  House  and  to 
the  country,  for  further  consideration  of  the  measure  before  it  is 
passed  into  law.  The  part  of  the  Bill  to  which  I  refer  especially 
is  Part  I,  which,  in  my  view,  stands  in  a  totally  different  category 
from  Part  II,  and  I  am  bound  to  say  that  the  House  has  always 
treated  it  almost  as  if  it  were  a  different  Bill.  .  .  .  This  is  not  a 
wrecking  Amendment.  I  want  the  Government  and  the  House  to 
understand  that  this  is  not  a  wrecking  Amendment,  and  it  is  not 
intended  to  be  a  wrecking  Amendment.  It  is  a  demand  for 
further  time ;  it  is  a  demand  that  the  Government  might  accede 
to  without  loss  of  prestige  to  themselves ;  it  is  a  demand  which,  if 
they  grant  it,  will  carr}'  great  benefit  to  the  Bill  upon  which  we 
are  engaged. 

If  I  may  turn  from  justification  for  my  Amendment  to  its  terms, 
I  would  like  to  say  a  few  words  with  reference  to  some  questions 
which  are  specifically  raised  by  the  Amendment  itself.  We  begin 
by  declaring  that  we  approve  of  the  objects  of  National  Insurance. 
That  is  a  perfectly  genuine  and  a  perfectly  honest  statement,  and 
a  statement  that  I  need  not  labour.  Indeed,  right  hon.  Gentlemen 
and  the  House  generally  know  enough  of  us  to  believe  what  we 
say  in  this  regard  is  perfectly  sincere  and  perfectly  genuine,  and  I 
do  not  think  this  requires  further  elaboration. 

In  the  second  place,  we  say  that,  in  our  opinion  at  any  rate,  the 
public  funds  and  individual  contributions  are  not  used  to  the  best 
advantage.  In  the  course  of  the  debates  in  Committee  attempts 
have  been  made  to  suggest  alternative  schemes.  Those  attempts 
have  not  met  with  a  ver}'  large  measure  of  success.  We  were  met 
with  difficulties  whenever  we  endeavoured  to  move  them.  The 
rules  of  the  House,  the  rules  of  our  debates,  the  rules  under 
which  we  conduct  our  debates,  the  strict  and  narrow  terms  of 


NATIONAL   INSURANCE  557 

the  Financial  Resolution,  all  combined  to  make  it  impossible  for 
us  to  develop,  as  we  should  have  wished  to  develop,  alternative 
proposals.   .   .  . 

This  matter  is  a  matter  which,  of  course,  very  largely  affects  the 
taxpayers,  and  there  is  one  particular  class  of  taxpayers  who,  I 
think,  are  very  closely  affected  by  the  proposals,  and  that  is  the 
class  of  persons  drawn  from  the  same  stratum  as  the  employed 
contributors  will  be  drawn  from,  the  persons  who,  because  they 
are  working  on  their  own  account,  will  have  to  contribute  towards 
the  provision  of  benefits  for  their  neighbors,  benefits  that  they  do 
not  receive  themselves.  And  I  could  show,  if  opportunity  offered, 
that  it  would  be  quite  possible  to  have  given  to  those  people  re- 
duced benefits  in  return  for  a  reduced  voluntary  contribution,  so 
that  they  would  not  have  been  left  out  in  the  cold  altogether,  and 
they  would  have  been  brought  within  the  beneficent  sphere  of  the 
proposals  of  this  Bill.  The  class  of  persons  I  have  in  mind  are 
persons  like  the  smaller  trader,  the  costermonger,  the  waterman 
plying  for  hire  in  his  own  boat,  the  small  tailor,  the  bootmaker, 
the  window  cleaner,  and  the  jobbing  gardener,  who  are  sections 
of  the  population  that  may  not  be  very  large  in  themselves,  but 
which,  added  together,  form  a  not  inconsiderable  portion  of  the 
population.   .   .   . 

I  pass  from  that  part  of  my  Amendment  to  consider  the  sugges- 
tion that  is  made  in  another  part,  that  this  Bill  is  unequal  in  its  op- 
eration. Surely,  I  think  it  will  be  admitted  in  all  quarters  of  the 
House  that  it  is  desirable  where  you  are  creating  a  national  scheme 
that  the  scheme  should  affect  all  classes  of  contributors  equally. 
All  employed  persons  in  this  country  are  brought  within  the  sphere 
of  this  Bill.  Are  they  all  treated  equally  ?  I  think  they  are  not,  and 
I  think  tiiere  is  one  class  of  person  the  inequality  of  whose  treat- 
ment is  so  patent  that  it  requires  no  argument  from  me,  and  that 
is  the  class  of  deposit  contributors.  What  the  deposit  contributor 
is  doing  in  an  Insurance  Bill  I  have  never  been  able  to  discover,  and 
I  should  have  thought  that  while  the  Bill  was  still  in  Committee, 


558  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

or  at  any  rate  before  we  reached  the  present  stage,  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  might  have  changed  the  wholly  fictitious  name, 
the  wholly  fictitious  title,  which  stands  at  the  head  of  that  section 
of  the  Bill,  and  that  he  would  no  longer  have  continued  to  describe 
this  as  deposit  insurance,  for  insurance  it  undoubtedly  is  not. 

I  am  not  at  all  satisfied  that  women  under  the  Bill  are  going 
to  be  treated  on  the  same  terms  as  men ;  I  will  say  very  briefly 
why.  It  depends  very  largely  on  what  effect  the  separation  of  the 
women's  from  the  men's  funds  is  going  to  have  upon  the  security 
of  the  women's  insurance.  I  am  rather  inclined  to  doubt  whether 
the  divisions  of  the  funds  will  not  make  the  position  of  women  far 
less  secure  under  the  Bill  than  it  would  have  been  if  the  fund  had 
remained  united.  .  .  . 

There  is  another  way  in  which,  I  think,  the  various  contributors 
will  be  unequally  dealt  with.  ...  I  hold,  in  common  with  many 
other  people,  that  the  effect  of  this  Bill,  giving,  as  you  are  bound 
to  do,  to  the  societies  the  free  choice  of  their  members,  will  be  to 
throw  into  the  ranks  of  the  strongest  societies  the  most  valuable 
risks  from  the  societies'  point  of  view.  You  will  gradually  find  the 
second-class  risk  going  into  the  second-class  societies,  and  so  forth, 
until  you  come  to  what  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  calls  the 
uninsurable  risk  of  the  deposit  contributor.  The  effect  of  that  will 
be  that  the  less  desirable  the  life  the  more  unstable  will  be  the  in- 
surance. That  is  a  prospect  which  we  cannot  face  without  consid- 
erable misgiving. 

One  further  aspect  of  the  question  that  I  should  like  to  touch 
upon  is  the  creation  of  the  so-called  National  fund.  W^hcn  the  Bill 
was  introduced  it  was  intended  to  be  a  great  national  scheme,  em- 
bracing all  parts  of  the  United  Kingdom,  carr)'ing  "  the  rare  and 
refreshing  fruit  to  the  parched  lips  "  of  the  employed  contributors 
in  whatever  part  of  the  country  they  lived,  under  precisely  the  same 
conditions  and  administered  by  precisely  the  same  authorities.  Since 
then  we  have  seen  this  great  national  scheme  split  up  into  four 
sections,  to  my  mind  to  great  disadvantage  to  the  insured  people, 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  559 

and  with  greatly  increased  cost  for  administration.  One  further 
result  is  that  there  is  no  sort  of  guarantee  that  we  shall  have  the 
same  kind  of  scheme  in  operation  in  any  one  of  these  sub-divisions 
of  our  nationalities  that  we  have  in  another.  Under  the  new  pro- 
visions of  the  Bill  the  Insurance  Commissioners  in  Ireland  will  be 
given  a  practically  free  hand  to  create  almost  a  different  system  of 
insurance  altogether  from  that  which  obtains  in  this  country.   .  .   . 

I  come  now  to  the  assertion  in  the  Amendment  that  the  Bill  has 
been  neither  adequately  discussed  in  this  House  nor  fully  explained 
to  the  countr)'.  I  have  only  to  enumerate  the  Clauses  which  were 
passed  without  discussion  to  show  how  ruthlessly  our  debates  have 
been  curtailed  and  how  incomplete  our  work  is  as  it  stands  at  pres- 
ent. ...  In  Part  I  thirty-two  Clauses  have  been  passed  without 
a  word  of  detailed  discussion.  Eighteen  were  passed  in  one  night 
under  the  guillotine  in  Committee.  As  evidence  of  the  haste*  with 
which  these  new  Clauses  were  drawn,  we  may  point  to  the  fact  that 
two  of  them  were  struck  out  of  the  Bill  by  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer  himself  as  soon  as  we  came  to  the  Report  stage.  .  .   . 

It  is  not  only  in  Committee  that  we  have  been  denied  the  oppor- 
tunity to  discuss  the  Clauses  of  the  Bill.  What  happened  on  Report  ? 
When  we  came  to  the  Report  stage  the  Bill  was  practically  recast, 
but  we  have  never  had  any  hand  in  the  discussion  of  it.  Out  of 
the  first  seventy-seven  Clauses  as  passed  through  Committee  the 
two  Clauses  to  which  I  have  already  referred  were  struck  out,  and 
sixty-eight  were  amended,  though  not  one  of  them  was  discussed. 
The  Report  stage  of  the  Bill  which  suffered  this  treatment  came  to 
an  end  on  Monday  last,  and  we  are  now  invited  to  read  it  a  third 
time,  after  only  one  day's  interval.  I  think  it  is  absolutely  impos- 
sible for  anyone  who  has  not  —  it  is  difficult  enough  for  those  who 
have  —  followed  the  debates  on  this  Bill  hour  by  hour,  almost 
minute  by  minute,  to  say  how  closely  this  Bill  resembles  the  Bill 
which  was  first  introduced,  or  how  widely  it  differs  from  it !  .  .  . 

I  have  referred  to  the  question  of  the  division  of  the  Irish,  Scot- 
tish, and  Welsh  funds  from  the  English  funds.    I  have  pointed  out 


56o  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

that  that  formed  no  part  of  the  original  scheme.  It  weakens  the 
stability  of  the  fund ;  it  leads  to  administrative  difficulties,  as  the 
trade  unions  will  find.  This  alteration  has  found  no  favour  with 
those  who  have  looked  at  this  Bill  as  a  method  of  insurance  and 
not  as  an  indirect  method  of  initiating  a  policy  of  Home  Rule  all 
round.   .   .   . 

People  have  spoken  on  the  Committee  stage,  and  people  still 
speak  in  the  country,  as  if  the  Bill  we  are  discussing  contained  the 
whole  scheme.  It  does  not.  The  great  mass  of  regulations  are  just 
as  important.  I  am  not  sure  they  are  not  even  more  far-reaching 
than  the  provisions  of  the  Bill  itself,  and  we  cannot  judge  fairly  of 
the  scheme  as  a  whole  until  we  see  in  print  the  regulations  as  well 
as  the  Bill  itself. 

In  the  earlier  part  of  what  I  said  I  invited  the  House  to  consider 
the  whole  meaning  of  the  Amendment  I  am  moving.  We  ask  in 
that  Amendment  that  the  door  should  be  kept  open  for  further 
discussion,  believing  that  further  discussion  would  lead  to  further 
improvements  —  to  improvements  that  would  be  the  outcome  of 
matured  thought,  of  sober  reflection,  and  of  quiet  and  considered 
judgment.  .   .  . 

On  the  night  of  the  introduction  of  the  scheme,  when  the  whole 
House  lay  under  the  spell  of  the  magic  eloquence  of  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  —  I  very  well  remember  the  effect  it  produced  — 
I  ventured  to  make  a  very  short  speech.  I  do  not  think  it  lasted 
five  minutes,  and  I  think  its  brevity  was,  perhaps,  its  chief  merit, 
but  in  the  course  of  what  I  said  I  laid  down  for  my  own  guidance 
a  distinct  line  of  policy,  which  I,  at  any  rate,  intend  to  follow  in 
regard  to  this  Bill,  and  perhaps  the  House  will  allow  me  to  quote 
a  few  words  from  what  I  said : 

This  is  not  a  scheme  of  charity ;  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  advanced  it 
as  a  business  proposition.  If  you  advance  it  as  a  business  proposition,  and 
such  proposition  it  undoubtedly  is,  it  lies  with  you  to  justify  the  claim  you 
make  upon  each  constituent  party  in  the  tripartite  partnership  —  the  work- 
man, the  employer,  and  the  State.  As  you  are  able  to  justify  the  contribution 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  561 

that  you  invoke,  so  shall  you  receive  the  support  of  all  classes  of  the  com- 
munity. Speaking,  if  I  may,  on  behalf  of  my  hon.  Friends  on  this  side  of 
the  House,  I  will  say  that  believing  as  we  do  that  you  are  animated  by  the 
sole  desire  to  confer  a  lasting  benefit  upon  all  classes  of  the  community,  so 
we  will  aid  you  in  the  perfection  of  the  details  of  the  scheme  with  all  the 
zeal  and  all  the  energy  and  all  the  good  will  we  can  give  it. 

To  the  line  of  policy  indicated  in  these  few  sentences  we  have 
adhered  strictly  and  constantly.  Discussion  has  not  always  been 
easy.  The  temptation  to  wander  into  the  field  of  controversy  and 
to  enter  into  the  joy  of  fight  has  not  always  been  so  easy  to  escape, 
and  I  am  bound  to  say  that  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  has 
occasionally  strewn  temptations  in  our  path.  On  the  whole,  our 
action  from  the  first  has  been  clearly  consistent.  We  have  sought 
by  all  the  means  in  our  power  to  improve  this  Bill.  .  .  . 

I  believe,  with  full  and  free  discussion,  with  full  and  fair  Amend- 
ments, this  Bill  could  be  made  into  a  most  potent  instrument  of 
good,  touching  as  it  does  at  every  point  the  lives  and  the  fortunes 
of  the  poorer  members  of  our  community,  the  men  and  women  who 
have  the  least  opportunity  of  striking  a  fair  balance  between  its 
merits  and  defects  which  cry  aloud  for. further  consideration  and 
further  amendment,  and  it  is  in  part  that  spirit  and  with  that  object 
that  I  beg  to  move  the  Amendment  standing  in  my  name. 


Extract  go 

NATIONAL  INSURANCE  AND  SELF-RELIANCE 

[Lord  Robert  Cecily  Commons,  December  6,  igii) 

Lord  R.  Cecil  ^ :  .  .  .  If  you  once  make  the  State  a  partner 
in  private  enterprise,  it  means  the  absorption  of  that  private  enter- 
prise by  the  State.  I  believe  that  to  be  a  principle  which  scarcely 
requires  to  be  defended.    If  you  want  to  see  it  in  full  operation,  you 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fifth  Series,  Commons,  vol.  32,  col.  \\'j(t-\\-']. 


562  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

have  merely  got  to  look  at  the  history  of  the  voluntary  schools  of 
this  country.  A  partnership  was  created  between  the  State  and  the 
voluntary  schools  in  the  matter  of  elementary  education,  and  that 
principle  was  advanced  in  1870.  What  has  been  its  history  since 
then  ?  Every  decade  has  seen  a  further  advance  of  the  State  and 
a  further  retirement  of  the  voluntary  principle,  until  at  the  present 
time  the  State  schools  are  all  compulsory,  all  free,  and  practically 
they  are  absolutely  under  the  control  and  management  of  the  State. 
The  voluntary  principle  has  practically  expired,  and  if  the  right 
hon.  Gentlemen  and  their  Friends  had  their  way,  they  would  give  it 
its  death  blow.  Therefore,  anyone  who  considers  the  history  of  the 
voluntary  schools  under  the  legislation  which  began  in  1870  will  see 
what  will  inevitably  happen  to  the  friendly  societies  under  the  legis- 
lation which  has  now  begun.  More  than  that,  the  voluntary  schools 
have  been  —  rightly  or  wrongly  —  kept  alive  by  a  strong  religious 
sentiment.  You  have  no  such  sentiment  —  at  all  events  not  of  that 
strength — to  keep  alive  friendly  societies.  Depend  upon  it,  this  Bill 
when  it  passes  is  the  death  warrant  of  the  friendly  societies  of  this 
country. 

For  those  reasons  I  am  strongly  opposed  to  a  compulsory  scheme. 
Finally  —  and  this  is  the  one  reason  which  moves  me  most  of  all  — 
I  regard  it  as  a  very  dangerous  precedent  to  liberty  and  independ- 
ence in  this  country,  and  that,  undoubtedly,  however  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  may  sneer  at  domestic  servants,  is  the  backbone 
of  the  agitation  against  this  Bill.  This  is  not  a  question  of  particular 
figures,  or  of  particular  discussions,  or  of  argumentative  leaflets,  or 
whether  this  or  that  person  pays.  The  backbone  of  the  agitation 
against  this  Bill  is  that  the  people  bitterly  resent  in  this  country 
being  made  to  apply  their  own  money  for  the  benefits  in  a  way  they 
do  not  approve.  It  is  defended  by  the  German  example  ;  but  that 
example  is  wholly  irrelevant.  The  whole  history  of  Germany  is  the 
history  of  the  control  of  the  individual  by  the  State.  Frederick 
William  established  an  elaborate  system,  of  State  control  over  the 
whole  lives  of  everyone  of  his  subjects.    That  has  been  the  history 


NATIONAL   INSURANCE  563 

of  Germany,  and  that  cannot  be  transplanted  to  this  country  with- 
out great  injury  to  the  institutions  of  this  country. 

I  have  a  fanatical  belief  in  individual  freedom.  I  believe  it  is  a 
vital  thing  for  this  country,  and  I  believe  it  is  the  cornerstone  upon 
which  our  prosperity  and  our  existence  is  built,  and,  for  my  part,  1 
believe  that  the  civic  qualities  of  self-control,  self-reliance,  and 
self-respect  depend  upon  individual  liberty  and  the  freedom  and 
independence  of  the  people  of  this  countr)^  We  all  remember  a 
great  phrase  of  a  great  prelate,  who  said  he  would  sooner  see  Eng- 
land free  than  England  sober.  It  has  been  greatly  misrepresented, 
but  properly  understood  I  agree  with  that  proposition.  I  think  it 
could  be  put  more  thoroughly  by  saying  that  you  cannot  have  so- 
briety without  freedom.  The  essence  of  the  virtue  of  sobriety  and 
all  civic  virtues  is  self-control  and  self-reliance,  and  you  cannot  have 
these  without  freedom.  And  it  is  because  I  believe  that  in  its  pres- 
ent form  this  Bill  is  a  great  danger  to  liberty,  and  was  so  regarded 
by  the  electors  I  had  the  honour  of  addressing  during  the  three  or 
four  weeks  of  my  election  campaign,  that  I  think  it  is  vital  it  should 
be  further  considered,  and  that  the  country  should  have  a  further 
opportunity  of  expressing  its  opinion  upon  it  and  of  saying  whether 
it  desires  to  have  these  German  shackles  put  upon  it,  or  whether  it 
would  not  prefer  to  have  a  scheme  founded  upon  the  principle  of 
liberty  and  independence. 


Extract  gi 

DEFECTS   IN   THE   GOVERNMENT   KILL 

{Rlr.  Bonar  Law,  Commons,  December  6,  igi i) 

Mr.  Bonar  Law  ^ :  .  .  .  Whatever  may  be  the  opinion  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  I  am  perfectly  certain  of  this,  that  three- 
fourths,  and  I   believe  nine-tenths,  of  the  people  of  this  country 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Commons,  I'ifth  Scries,  vol.  32,  col.  1504  sqq. 


564  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

take  our  view  to-day.  The}^  are  not  hostile  to  the  proposals  of  the 
Bill,  neither  are  we ;  but  they  are  convinced  that  it  has  not  been 
either  properly  considered  by  this  House  or  properly  understood 
in  the  country,  and  that  further  time  should  be  given  for  both  pur- 
poses. That  is  our  Amendment,  and  when  we  have  voted  for  it, 
so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  I  shall  take  no  further  part  in  any  further 
Amendment.  I  shall  leave  to  the  Government  the  responsibility, 
and  it  is  a  very  big  responsibility,  of  forcing  an  immense  scheme 
like  this  upon  the  country,  when  there  is  not  a  man  in  this  House 
who  does  not  know  that  it  has  not  been  properly  considered  and 
is  not  a  measure  which,  in  its  present  form,  can  be  otherwise  than 
disadvantageous  to  the  people  of  this  country.  .  .  . 

I  hardly  venture  to  mention  the  trade  unions,  because  I  remem- 
ber the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  was  very  sarcastic  about  my 
hon.  Friend  who  was  leading  the  Opposition  [Mr.  Arthur  J.  Balfour], 
because  he  took  an  interest  in  these  bodies.  I  venture,  with  all 
humility,  to  say  that  I  also  am  interested  in  them.  Is  there  any 
member  of  a  trade  union  who  doubts  that,  judging  by  the  pounds, 
shillings,  and  pence  interest,  it  will  be  to  the  advantage  of  members 
of  trade  unions  to  leave  their  societies  (for  they  cannot  give  the 
same  benefits),  and  join  societies  which  will  give  higher  benefits .-' 
It  must  be  so.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  trade  unionists  may  not 
be  actuated  by  other  motives.  I  am  the  first  to  acknowledge  that 
the  working-class  have  always  shown  a  readiness  to  sacrifice  them- 
selves for  the  interests  of  their  class  as  a  whole.  I  admit  that,  and 
I  do  not  say  that  actuated  by  these  unselfish  motives  they  may 
not  still  continue  to  be  members  of  trade  unions.  But  if  they  do, 
it  will  be  against  their  interests,  and  the  temptation  will  be  very 
great  for  the  best  lives  to  leave  the  trade  unions  and  join  societies 
where  they  will  get  better  benefits. 

If  that  is  true,  even  within  the  limits  of  approved  societies,  what 
is  it  when  you  come  down  to  the  wretched  outcasts  who  are  deposit 
contributors  ?  We  have  been  accused  a  great  deal  this  afternoon 
of  a  change  of  front,  more  or  less,  on  this  Bill.    I  am  not  going 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  565 

to  say  anything  stronger  on  this  subject  than  I  said  on  the  second 
reading.  I  pointed  out,  as  every  Member  of  the  House  recog- 
nised, that  the  condition  of  these  deposit  contributors  is  an  utterly 
unjustifiable  one.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman,  I  remember,  inter- 
rupted me  while  I  was  speaking  and  asked  me  what  we  would 
propose.  I  said  that  it  was  not  my  business  to  propose,  but  that 
if  I  were  on  that  bench  I  would  be  glad  to  do  so.   .  .   . 

I  do  not  think  the  House  in  the  least  realises  what  this  Bill 
means  from  the  financial  side.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  always 
states  the  matter  in  connection  with  the  old  age  pensions.  When 
these  two  schemes  are  in  full  operation,  the  amount  of  money  which 
will  be  deposited  in  this  way  will  be,  —  I  have  not  made  a  calcu- 
lation of  what  then  will  be  the  amount  of  the  National  Debt,  —  I 
think,  two  or  three  times  the  annual  charge  on  our  National  Debt. 
I  am  sure  it  will  amount  to  a  Jarger  sum  of  money  than  the  whole 
of  the  revenue  of  any  country  in  the  world  except  the  first  six  or 
seven  great  countries.  I  speak  of  the  whole  of  the  money  dealt 
with.  It  is  a  prodigious  sum  and  surely  worth  while  spending  a  little 
time  on  to  be  assured  that  it  is  dealt  with  in  the  best  manner.  There 
is  something  else  to  be  said.  The  right  hon.  Gentleman  has  always 
spoken  of  the  charge  of  those  two  burdens  on  the  State  as  some- 
thing like  ^18,000,000.    It  is  nothing  like  that,  and  he  knows  it. 

Take  old  age  pensions  alone.  They  began  under  the  present 
Prime  Minister  at  ^6,000,000.  That  amount  has  now  doubled. 
[An  Hon.  Member:  More  than  doubled.]  More  than  doubled, 
but  that  is  only  the  beginning.  Thirty  years  hence  that  charge 
will  be  more  than  double  what  it  is  now.  That  is  not  an  estimate. 
[An  Hon.  Member  :  Oh !  ]  Hon.  Members  below  the  gangway 
misunderstand  my  argument.  I  do  not  say  the  money  is  not  well 
spent.  All  I  say  is  that  we  should  realise  what  the  amount  of  it  is. 
This  is  not  an  estimate.  It  does  not  depend  upon  the  growth  of  the 
population.  Our  population  thirty  years  hence  may  be  precisely 
as  to-day,  yet  the  charge  for  old  age  pensions  will  be  doubled. 
[An  Hon.  Member:   How.?]    I  think  that  ought  to  be  pretty 


566  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

obvious.  It  is  obvious  to  those  who  have  followed  the  subject. 
It  depends  upon  the  number  of  people  born  at  the  time  which 
will  bring  them  under  the  Pension  Act,  and  it  will  depend  upon 
the  mortality  rate.  The  number  of  people  born  forty  years  ago 
who  will  become  old  age  pensioners  thirty  years  hence,  coupled 
with  the  steady  decrease  in  the  rate  of  mortality,  means  that  there 
will  be  double  the  charge  whatever  happens. 

The  Old  Age  Pension  Act  is  a  fact.  1  do  not  suggest  that  any 
change  should  be  made  about  it.  The  country  has  got  to  face  the 
burden.  But  surely,  as  men  of  common  sense,  anyone  responsible 
for  this  new  scheme  would  say,  inasmuch  as  the  old  age  pensions 
are  rolling  up  a  debt  for  posterity,  it  is  our  duty  in  this  scheme  to 
see  that  we  pay  our  full  share  to-day ;  and  if  there  is  any  shifting 
of  the  scale,  it  should  be  in  favour  of  coming  generations  and  against 
ourselves.  Is  that  not  common  sense  j*  That  is  naturally  what  would 
have  been  done  if  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  had  given  his 
honest  2d.  a  week  from  the  beginning  in  the  same  way  as  the 
employer  and  the  employed  have  given  theirs.  He  does  not  do  it. 
I  can  conceive  no  earthly  reason  why,  except  that  by  his  present 
method  he  is  able  to  say  that  the  State  is  giving  2d.  when  it  is 
giving  nothing  of  the  kind.  Had  this  Bill  been  introduced  by  any 
other  Minister  except  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  and  if  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  had  thought  it  his  duty  to  do  so,  — 
and  we  have  all  thought  it  was  the  duty  of  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer  to  look  after  the  stability  of  the  national  finances,  — 
whatever  else  might  have  been  done,  this  Bill  would  not  have  been 
financed  in  the  way  it  has  been  financed.  In  private  business  the 
method  which  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  has  adopted  is  everywhere 
recognised  as  the"  most  rotten  method  that  anyone  could  conceive. 
It  is  the  method  adopted  by  directors  of  companies  who  pay  big 
dividends  without  looking  at  the  liabilities  which  they  know  are 
confronting  them.  It  is  the  method  which  brings  such  companies 
into  the  Bankruptcy  Court,  and  very  often  brings  the  directors  to 
the  prison  cell.  .  .  . 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  567 

The  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  has  squared  hon.  Gentlemen 
below  the  gangway.  That  is  not  a  very  difificult  thing  to  do.  The 
right  hon.  Gentleman  the  Patronage  Secretary  for  the  Treasury  is 
one  of  the  most  astute  politicians  we  have  got,  and  he  made  some 
remarks  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Liberal  party  which  I  think 
were  very  instructive.  They  were  to  this  effect.  I  have  got  his 
actual  words  if  necessary.  "  I  think  it  is  to  our  interest  as  a  party 
that  the  Labour  party  should  be  quite  independent  of  us  in  the 
constituencies,  but  their  co-operation  in  the  House  has  been  most 
useful  and  most  fruitful."  In  other  words,  let  them  appear  to  be 
independent  outside,  but  let  them  be  in  our  pockets  inside.  That 
is  an  ideal  arrangement,  but  I  do  not  think  it  will  last  long.  He 
squared  these  Gentlemen,  and  surely  they  are  easily  squared.  .  .  . 

At  the  Hull  election  in  June  the  following  leaflet  was  sent  by  the 
Liberal  headquarters  to  that  election,  and  I  have  made  inquiries 
about  it.  Until  after  that  no  leaflet  of  any  kind  against  the  Insur- 
ance Bill  was  sent  from  our  central  office.  What  is  this  leaflet  ? 
It  is  the  picture  of  a  workingman  ill  in  bed  and  the  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer  with  a  copy  of  the  Insurance  Bill.  If  you  look  only 
at  the  picture  we  have  no  reason  to  take  offence,  but  I  think  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman  could  bring  a  successful  action  against  the 
artist,  because  looking  at  the  picture  alone  one  would  be  more 
inclined  to  think  he  had  come  to  pick  his  pocket.  That  was  not, 
of  course,  the  intention  of  the  picture,  and  this  is  what  it  said, 
"  The  Dawn  of  Hope."  And  this  is  the  moral  of  it,  "  Support  the 
Liberal  Government."  .   .  . 

That  is  the  Gentleman  who  accuses  us  of  using  the  Insurance 
Bill  for  electioneering  purposes.  Obviously  that  was  not  the  reason 
for  the  second  nature  coming  into  play.  We  all  know  it  is  one  of 
the  penalties  the  country  has  to  pay  for  having  a  Government  in 
office  and  not  in  power.  They  have  signed  their  bond.  For  two 
years  they  have  been  allowed  to  swagger  about  like  free  agents, 
but  next  year  the  bond  has  to  be  redeemed  and  for  that  reason, 
whatever  the  effect  of  the  Bill  on  the  millions  of  people  in  this 


568  BRITISH    SOCIAL  POLITICS 

country,  it  must  be  shoved  aside  so  that  the  bond  may  be  paid. 
Now  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  is  coming  to  prophesy  about  the 
future.  He  gave  a  hint  of  it  to-night  at  the  end  of  his  speech. 
He  put  it  more  clearly  in  his  sermon  at  the  Tabernacle.  He  says 
that  we  who  are  refusing  to  shut  our  eyes  and  open  our  mouths 
and  swallow  whatever  he  gives  us  —  I  am  not  giving  his  exact 
words  —  will  be  praying  soon  for  the  cloud  of  oblivion  to  come 
down  and  cover  our  heads.  That  is  the  prophecy.  Carlyle  once 
said,  "  You  cannot  argue  with  a  prophet.  You  can  only  refuse  to 
believe  him."  I  do  refuse  to  believe  him.  I  have  never,  certainly 
in  my  time  in  this  House,  given  any  vote  with  more  absolute  cer- 
tainty that  I  was  consulting  the  best  interests  of  the  country  than 
I  shall  give  to-night,  and  if  a  cloud  of  oblivion  is  required,  it  will 
not  be  for  those  who  have  decided  in,  as  near  as  I  can  recall,  the 
words  of  the  Amendment  that  this  Bill  is  unequal  in  its  operation 
and  should  be  further  considered  by  this  House. 


Extract  g2 

FINAL  TLEA   FOR  NATIONAL  INSURANCE 

{Mr.  H.  H.  Asqiiifh,  Prime  Minister  and  First  Lord  of  tJie  Treasury, 
Commons,  December  6,  ign) 

Mr.  Asquith  ^ :  .  .  .  Here  is  a  great  party  on  a  great  occasion 
dealing  with  a  great  Bill,  and  they  are  going  to  follow  their  leader 
and  say  neither  "  Yes  "  nor  "  No."  That  is  the  new  programme 
of  the  Tory  party.  I  wish  them  joy  of  it.  The  right  hon.  Gentle- 
man must  give  me  leave  to  say  to  him  that  peoples'  intentions  are 
to  be  judged  not  by  the  motives  which  in  the  more  or  less  nebular 
background  operate  upon  their  minds.  They  must  be  judged  by 
the  consequences  of  their  conduct.  All  this  lip  service  and  zeal  for 
insurance  against  sickness  and  unemployment,  all  this  loud-mouthed 

1  Parliamentary  Debates,  Fifth  Series,  Commons,  vol.  32,  col.  15 18  sqq. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  569 

profession  of  a  desire  to  attain  the  ends  of  this  Bill,  and  to  accept 
its  principle,  will  be  construed,  and  construed  rightly,  by  the  elec- 
torate of  this  country  by  action  which  you  are  taking  to-night.  Let 
us  assume,  —  and  we  are  bound  to  assume  it  for  the  purposes  of 
argument,  although  it  is  not  likely  to  happen  in  fact,  —  let  us  as- 
sume that  the  Amendment  is  carried.  What  becomes  of  the  Insur- 
ance Bill }  Everybody  knows  that  it  is  dead.  [Hon.  Members  : 
Why.'']  For  the  very  sufficient  Parliamentary  reason  [Hon. 
Members  :  No,  no.]  that  whenever  an  Amendment  on  the 
third  reading  is  carried,  a  Bill  ceases  to  exist.  I  say  quite  plainly 
to  this  House,  and  I  shall  say  it  to  the  countr}',  that  the  persons 
responsible  for  the  framing  of  this  Amendment  and  those  who  go 
into  the  Lobby  in  support  of  it  are  people  who  have  killed  the 
greatest  scheme  for  the  social  benefit  of  the  people  of  this  country 
that  has  ever  yet  been  conceived.  They  will  not  understand  your 
fine  distinctions  between  Yes  and  No,  seeing  that  the  adoption  of 
this  Amendment  would  be  fatal  to  the  carrying  of  any  insurance 
scheme  for  an  indefinite  time. 

Let  me  examine  the  reasons  which  have  been  alleged  for  this 
delay.  I  have  heard  the  Committee  criticisms  of  this  Bill.  No  one 
has  attacked  its  central  principle.  Its  central  principle  is  this  —  that 
as  regards  both  sickness,  invalidity,  and  unemployment  there  shall 
be  a  compulsor}'  contribution  to  which  the  employer,  the  workman, 
and  the  State  shall  be  party.  When  we  brought  forward  our  pro- 
posals for  old  age  pensions  three  years  ago,  that  principle  was  very 
strongly  advocated,  and  by  no  one  more  strongly  than  the  Leader 
of  the  Opposition.  I  think  we  were  perfectly  right  not  to  adopt 
the  principle  of  contribution  in  regard  to  old  age  pensions,  because 
I  am  satisfied  —  as  I  was  then  —  that  a  system  of  old  age  pen- 
sion based  upon  contribution  would  have  been  futile  and  a  failure. 
But  three  years  ago  we  laid  the  ground  without  which  this  Bill 
would  not  have  been  possible. 

As  regards  the  principle  of  compulsory  contribution  for  the  pur- 
poses which  are  contemplated  under  this  Bill,  I  am  not  the  least 


570  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

ashamed  to  confess  —  my  words  have  been  quoted  —  that  I  was 
a  somewhat  reluctant,  although  I  am  now  a  completely  convinced, 
convert.  I  do  not  think  that  there  is  any  other  way  in  which  we 
can  provide  for  the  risks  and  hazards  of  industrial  life. 

The  real  and  only  ground,  apart  from  the  criticisms,  alleged  in 
support  of  this  Amendment,  is  the  insufficiency  of  the  time  which 
has  been  given  to  the  consideration  of  it.  Let  me  just  look  into 
that.  On  the  question  of  time,  when  the  Bill  was  first  introduced, 
what  was  the  demand?  It  was  that  the  unemployment  part  — 
Part  II  —  should  be  dropped  on  the  ground  that  it  was  experi- 
mental in  its  character.  It  was  never  suggested  that  there  would 
not  be  time  for  the  discussion  of  the  sickness  and  invalidity  insur- 
ance. As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  twenty-five  Clauses  which  compose 
Part  II  were  passed  upstairs  after  a  very  full  and  very  friendly 
discussion  practically  without  opposition,  and  they  were  only  briefly 
dealt  with  on  Report.  I  do  not  think  that  in  any  quarter  of  the 
House  there  is  any  doubt  as  to  the  desirability  of  Part  II  passing 
into  law.  If  this  Amendment  is  carried,  that  will  not  be  carried  out ; 
it  will  be  indefinitely  postponed. 

In  regard  to  Part  I  let  us  see  how  the  case  stands.  I  cannot 
follow  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  in  some  of  the  points  taken.  But 
there  were  four  important  points  with  regard  to  this  vital  and  most 
important  part  of  the  Bill.  The  points  were  who  was  to  be  insured, 
what  contributions  were  to  be  paid,  what  benefits  were  to  be  given, 
and  what  provision  ought  to  be  made  for  those  who  are  called 
Post  Office  contributors  and  who  are  left  outside  the  general 
scheme  of  insurance.  I  have  gone  most  carefully  —  and  if  time 
permitted  I  could  demonstrate  to  the  House  by  evidence  what  I  am 
going  to  say  —  into  the  amount  of  time  which  has  actually  been 
spent  on  each  one  of  these  four  points,  and  I  will  venture  to  say 
that  if  there  had  been  no  guillotine  at  all,  if  there  had  been  no  allo- 
cation of  time,  and  no  curtailment  of  debate,  there  is  not  one  of 
them  which  could,  under  reasonable  conditions,  have  been  more 
fully  and  more  amply  discussed  than  they  have  been. 


NATIONAL  INSURANCE  571 

Looking  forward  to  the  future,  let  me  ask  the  House,  and  ask  the 
right  hon.  Gentleman  himself,  what  would  be  the  effect  of  carrying 
an  Amendment  for  the  postponement  of  the  further  consideration 
of  this  Bill  ?  In  the  first  place,  if  you  accept  the  principle  of  com- 
pulsory contributions  and  the  desirability  of  the  scheme  as  a  whole, 
it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  that  the  machinery  —  the  Commis- 
sioners and  so  forth  — ■  should  at  once  be  set  into  operation,  and 
that  they  should  be  able  to  bring  about  what  I  believe  to  be  the 
essential  condition  for  the  successful  working  of  a  scheme  like  this, 
namely,  co-operation  between  the  Commissioners,  the  Joint  Com- 
mittee, the  friendly  societies,  the  trade  unions,  the  doctors,  and  all 
the  other  interests  concerned,  in  order  that  when  misunderstand- 
ings have  been  removed,  they  should  all  combine  together,  as  I 
believe  they  will  in  the  course  of  a  very  few  months,  to  make  this 
not  only  a  workable,  but  a  successful  scheme.  All  that  is  to  be 
thrown  away  and  to  be  postponed  to  the  remote  future  if  this 
Amendment  is  carried. 

Further,  I  cannot,  in  view  of  what  the  right  hon.  Gentleman  has 
said,  ignore,  and  nobody  can  ignore,  what  would  be  the  results  of 
leaving  this  matter  open  as  a  subject  of  public  controversy  for 
months  or  even  years.  I  am  not  going  into  the  recriminations 
which  have  been  legitimately  and  naturally  interchanged  [Laughter.] 
—  I  hope  that  is  a  remark  free  from  offence  —  both  upon  the  one 
side  and  the  other,  or  what  has  been  said  at  bye-elections  in  regard  to 
this  particular  Bill,  but,  without  going  into  the  rights  or  wrongs  of 
that  matter,  is  there  a  single  man,  in  whatever  quarter  of  the  House 
he  sits,  who  is  really  anxious  for  a  settlement  of  this  great  social 
problem,  at  any  rate  upon  the  general  lines  of  the  Bill,  who  would 
not  lament  if  at  bye-elections  for  the  next  twelve  or  twenty-four 
months  it  should  be  cast  into  the  forefront  of  political  controversy 
and  become  the  subject  of  the  more  envenomed  interchange  of 
amenities  such  as  we  have  heard  read  out  ?  Is  there  anyone  who 
has  really  the  interests  of  society  at  heart  who  thinks  it  is  likely  to 
contribute  to  a  permanent  and  considered  settlement  ?  I  will  say 


572  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

nothing  as  to  the  campaign  of  misrepresentation  which  has  been 
carried  on  in  certain  quarters  and  which  is  certain  to  be  carried  on 
with  increased  intensity  and  virulence  so  long  as  the  question  re- 
mains open  and  which  happily  will  be  brought  to  an  end  if  the 
question  is  settled.  I  would  like  to  make,  in  an  entirely  —  if  I  may 
say  so  for  the  moment  —  non-party  spirit,  before  the  House  comes 
to  a  decision,  one  final  appeal. 

We  are  nearing  the  close  of  an  exceptionally  arduous  Session. 
I  think  it  ought  to  be  to  Members  an  adequate  and  even  an  ample 
reward  for  their  long  and  assiduous  labours  that  the  same  Parlia- 
mentary year  which  has  already  witnessed  the  close  of  a  great  con- 
stitutional struggle  [Hon.  MeiMBERS  :  No,  no  ;  the  beginning.]  — 
well,  the  close  of  one  stage  of  the  great  constitutional  struggle, 
fought  upon  purely  political  ground  —  when  this  Bill  has  passed 
into  law,  as  I  believe  it  will,  witnesses  also  the  statutory  enactment 
of  a  second  and  a  larger  instalment  of  that  policy  of  social  reform 
of  which  old  age  pensions  was  the  first  chapter. 

I  have  said  before,  and  certainly  history  proves,  while  it  is  pos- 
sible, while  it  is  even  easy  to  put  down  the  mighty  from  their  seats 
without  exalting  the  humble  and  the  meek,  the  most  ardent  spirit 
among  us  in  the  cause  of  political  equality,  still  far  short  of  com- 
plete achievement,  will  be  the  first  to  recognise  that  political  ma- 
chinery is  only  valuable  and  is  only  worth  having  if  it  is  adapted 
to  and  used  for  worthy  social  ends. 

I  brush  aside,  and  I  hope  the  House  will  brush  aside,  this  Amend- 
ment—  this  halting,  faltering,  paltering  Amendment  —  and  I  say  the 
House,  in  reading  this  Bill  a  third  time,  are  conferring  upon  mil- 
lions of  our  fellow  countrymen  by  the  joint  operation  of  self-help 
and  of  State  help,  the  greatest  alleviation  of  the  risks  and  sufferings 
of  life  that  Parliament  has  ever  conferred  upon  any  people. 


APPENDIX 

THE   BRITISH   CABINET,   1905-1912 

Prime  Minister  and  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury:  Arthur  J. 

Balfour  (U),    1902;    Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman  (L),    1905; 

Herbert  H.  Asquith  (L),  1908. 
Lord  President  of  the  Council:  Marquess  of  Londonderry  (U), 

1903;  Earl  of  Crewe  (L),    1905;  Viscount  Wolverhampton  (L), 

1908;  Viscount  Morley  of  Blackburn  (L),  190S. 
Lord  High  Chancellor:  Earl  of  Halsbury  (U),  1895;  Lord  Lore- 
burn  (L),   1905;  Viscount  Haldane  (L),  1912. 
Lord  Privy  Seal:  Marquess  of  Salisbury  (U),    1903;  Marquess  of 

Ripon  (L),  1905;  Earl  of  Crewe  (L),  igoS;   Earl  Carrington  (L), 

191 1  ;  Marquess  of  Crewe  (L),  191 2. 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer:  J.  Austen  Chamberlain (U),  1902  ; 

Herbert  H.  Asquith  (L),  1905  ;   David  Lloyd  George  (L),  1908. 
Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs  :  Marquess  of  Lans- 

downe  (U),  1900;  Sir  Edward  Grey  (L),  1905. 
Secretary  of  State  for  the   Home  Department  :   A.  Akers- 

Douglas  (U),  1902;  Herbert  J.  Gladstone  (L),  1905;  Winston  S. 

Churchill  (L),  1910;  Reginald  McKenna  (L),  191 1. 
Secretary    of    State   for    India:    St.    John    Brodrick,    Viscount 

Midleton  (U),  1903;   John  Morley  (L),  1905;    Earl  of  Crewe  (L), 

1910. 
Secretary  of   State  for  the   Colonies  :    Alfred  Lyttelton  (U), 

1903;   Earl  of  Elgin  (L),  1905;   Earl  of  Crewe  (L),   1908;   Lewis 

Harcourt  (L),  1910. 
Secretary  of  State  for  War:  H.  O.  Arnold- Forster  (U),  1903; 

Viscount  Haldane  (L),  1905;  Col.  J.  E.  B.  Seely  (L),  1912. 
First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty:  Earl  of  Selborne  (U),  1900;  Lord 

Tweedmouth  (L),   1905;   Reginald  McKenna  (L),   190S;  Winston 

S.  Churchill  (L),  1 9 1 1 . 

573 


574  BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 

Chief  Secretary  to  the  Lord-Lieutenant  of  Ireland  :  George 

Wyndham  (U),  1900;  Walter  H.  Long  (U),   1905;  James  Bryce 

(L),  1905;  Augustine  Birrell  (L),  1907. 
President  of  the  Board  of  Trade:  Gerald  W.  Balfour  (U),  1900; 

Marquess  of  Salisbury  (U),  1905  ;  David  Lloyd  George  (L),  1905  ; 

Winston  S.  Churchill  (L),  1908;  Sydney  Buxton  (L),  1910. 
President  of  the  Local  Government  Board:  Walter  H.  Long 

(U),  1900;  Gerald  W.  Balfour  (U),  1905;  John  Burns  (L),  1905. 
President  of  the  Board  of  Education  :  Marquess  of  Londonderry 

(U),  1902;  Augustine  Birrell  (L),   1905;  Reginald  McKenna  (L), 

1907;  Walter  Runciman  (L),  1908;  Joseph  Albert  Pease  (L),  191 1. 
President  of  the  Board  of  Agriculture  and  Fisheries  :  Earl 

of  Onslow  (U),  1903  ;  Earl  Carrington  (L),  1905  ;  Walter  Runci- 
man (L),  191 1. 
Secretary  for  Scotland  :  Marquess  of  Linlithgow  (U),  1895  ;  Lord 

Pendand  (L),  1905;  T.  McKinnon  Wood  (L),  1912. 
Postmaster-General:  Earl  of  Derby  (U),  i 903  ;  Sydney  Buxton  (L), 

1905;  Herbert  Samuel  (L),  1910. 
Chancellor  of  the  Duchy  of  Lancaster  :  Sir  Henry  Fowler  (L), 

1905;    Lord  Fitzmaurice  (L),   1908;   Herbert  Samuel  (L),   1909; 

Joseph  Albert  Pease  (L),  1910;  C.  E.  Hobhouse  (L),  191 1. 
First  Commissioner  of  Works:   Lewis  Harcoart  (L),   1907;  Earl 

Beauchamp  ( L),  1 9 1  o . 
Attorney-General:   Sir  R.  B.  Finlay  (U),  1900;  J.  Lawson  Walton 

(L),  1905;  William  S.   Robson  (L),  1908;   Sir  Rufus  Isaacs  (L), 

1910. 


INDEX 


Afforestation,  315,  335,  367 

Agriculture,  315  sqq.,  335  sqq.,  368 
sq. 

Akers-Douglas,  A.,  on  workmen's 
compensation,  20,  32  sqq. 

Alden,  Percy,  3,  19,  185 

Anglican  Church,  in  House  of  Lords, 
5,  7,  3S8  sq.,  390  sq. 

Anglo-French  Convention  on  work- 
ingmen's  insurance,  72  sqq. 

Anson,  Sir  William,  on  the  Lords' 
veto,  421,  460  sqq. 

Asquith,  H.  IL,  14;  on  child  welfare, 
107  ;  on  old  age  pensions,  131, 134 
sqq.,  138  sqq.  ;  on  the  budget,  350 
sq. ;  on  the  Lords'  veto  of  the  bud- 
get, 358  sq. ;  on  the  Lords,  423  ; 
on  parliament  bill,  426  sqq.,  430, 
432  sq.,  436  sq ;  and  the  parlia- 
mentary conference,  430  sq. ;  on 
national  insurance,  510,  568  sqq. 

Australia,  social  politics  in,  3  ;  Sec- 
ond Chamber  in,  461 

Austria,  sweated  labour  in,  233;  town 
planning  in,  2S6  sq. 

Baboeuf,  2 

Back-to-back  houses,  275  sqq.,  284 
sq. 

Balfour,  A.  J.,  11  ;  on  old  age  pen- 
sions, 133,  151  €qq. ;  on  minimum 
wage  for  sweated  industries,  219, 
236  sq. ;  on  the  budget,  349 ;  on 
the  Lords'  veto  of  the  budget, 
359;  on  powers  of  the  House  of 
Lords,  421,  449  sqq.;  on  parlia- 
ment bill,  428  sq.,  433 ;  and  the 
parliamentary  conference,  431 

Banbury,  Sir  Frederick,  on  labour 
exchanges,  186;  on  minimum 
wage,  21S,  225  sq.,  230;  on  de- 
velopment bill,  325  sq. 


Bankers,  protest  against  the  budget, 

351  sq.,  394  sq. 

Barnes,  G.  N.,  on  workmen's  com- 
pensation, 20,  34  sqq. ;  on  land 
development,  268,  329  sq. ;  on  the 
budget,  349 

Beauchamp,  Earl,  on  housing,  266, 
278  sqq. 

Birmingham,  Bishop  of.  See  Gore, 
Charles 

Birrell,  Augustine,  14;  on  meals  for 
school  children,  109,  116  sqq.; 
and  the  parliamentary  conference, 

431 
Bismarck,  3,  363,  544 
Bonar  Law,  A.    See  Law,  A.  Bonar 
Boyd-Carpenter,  William,  on  old  age 

pensions,  133,  165  sqq. 
Bristol,    Bishop    of.      See    Browne, 

G.  F. 
Browne,  G.  F.,  on  the  budget,  357, 

388  sqq. 
Bryce,  James,  14 
Budget  of  1909,  introduction  of,  361 

sqq. ;   adopted  provisions  of,  408 

sqq. ;    public   demonstrations  on, 

352  sqq. ;  and  land  monopoly,  265 
sqq. ;  and  the  Lords'  veto,  423 

Bureaucracy,  dangers  of,  285  sq., 
288,  562  sq. 

Burns,  John,  14 ;  on  old  age  pen- 
sions, 131  ;  on  housing  and  town 
planning,  265,  269  sqq. 

Buxton,  Sydney,  14 ;  on  old  age 
pensions,  132  ;  on  national  insur- 
ance, 507,  536  sqq. 

Campbell-Bannerman,  Sir  Henry, 
14,  18,  131  ;  on  trade  unions,  78; 
on  land  development,  330 ;  on 
powers  of  House  of  Lords,  421, 
438  sqq. 


575 


S76 


British  social  politics 


Canterbury,  Archbishop  of.  See 
Davidson,  R.  T. 

Carrington,  Earl,  14;  on  land  devel- 
opment, 269,  330  sqq. ;  on  reform 
of  House  of  Lords,  426 

Carson,  Sir  Edward,  13 ;  on  trade 
unions,  77  sq. ;  on  parliament  bill, 

436 

Cecil,  Lord  Robert,  on  trade  unions, 
77;  on  infant  mortality,  109,  122 
sqq.;  on  old  age  pensions,  132, 
149  sqq.;  on  land  development, 
268,  314  sqq.;  on  national  insur- 
ance, 510,  561  sqq. 

Chamberlain,  Austen,  on  the  budget, 
351,  356;  on  parliamentary  con- 
ference, 431  ;  on  national  insur- 
ance, 507 

Chamberlain,  Joseph,  on  workmen's 
compensation,  20,  36  sqq.;  on  old 
age  pensions,  130,  164;  on  tariff 
reform,  347 ;  on  the  House  of 
Lords,  472 

Children  Act  (190S),  109,  124  sqq. 

Child  welfare,  107  sqq.,  136 

Churchill,  ^Yinston,  on  unemploy- 
ment, 1S6,  191  sqq.,  212,  506;  on 
minimum  wage  for  sweated  labour, 
219  sqq. ;  on  the  budget,  349  sq., 
355  ;  on  the  Lords'  veto,  422,  464 
sqq. 

Clynes,  J.  R.,  on  workmen's  com- 
pensation, 21,  43  sqq. 

Commission  on  Housing  of  the 
Working  Classes,  264 

Commission  on  Physical  Deteriora- 
tion, 107  sq.,  126 

Commission  on  Poor  Law,  131,  133, 
160,  163  ;  report  of,  185,  187  sqq., 
192  sq,,  197 

Committee  on  Sweating  System, 
217,  226  sqq. 

Commons,  House  of,  debate  on 
workmen's  compensation  bill,  20 
sqq. ;  trade  unions  and  trade  dis- 
putes bill,  77  sqq. ;  payment  of 
members,  79,  102  sqq. ;  old  age 
pensions  bill,  132  sq.,  140  sqq.; 
power  in  financial  matters,  164; 
labour  exchanges  bill,  186  sq., 
191    sqq.  ;   trade  boards  bill,   218 


sqq. ;  housing  and  town  planning 
bill,  265  sq.,  269  sqq. ;  develop- 
ment bill,  267  sq.,  314  sqq. ;  the 
budget,  349  sqq.,  360  sqq. ;  con- 
flict with  the  Lords  over  the  bud- 
get, 358  sq.  ;  resolutions  of  1907, 
421  sq.,  438  sqq. ;  parliament  bill, 
426  sqq.,  434  sqq. ;  national  insur- 
ance in,  507  sqq.,  51 1  sqq. 

Conference  on  relations  between 
the  Houses  of  Parliament,  430 
sqq. 

Conservative  party,  achievements 
of,  8  sqq. ;  in  House  of  Lords, 
18,  440  sqq.,  467  sqq.,  472  ;  on 
workmen's  compensation,  32  sqq., 
41  sqq. ;  on  child  welfare,  108  ;  on 
old  age  pensions,  130,  132  sq. ;  on 
unemployment,  186  sq.,  206  sqq. ; 
on  sweating  and  minimum  wage, 
218,  236  sq.,  245  sqq. ;  on  housing, 
266;  on  land  development,  268, 
314  sqq.;  on  finance,  347  sqq.; 
on  the  Lords'  veto  of  the  budget, 
359  sqq. ;  on  parliament  bill,  433 
sqq.,  497  ;  on  national  insurance, 
507,  509  sq.,  555  sqq. 

Conspiracy  and  Protection  of  Prop- 
erty Act  (1S75),  79'  8-,  98  sqq. 

Corruption  in  politics,  150,  318  sqq., 
567  sq. 

Cox,  Harold,  on  meals  for  school 
children,  109,  112  sqq.;  on  old 
age  pensions,  132,  143  sqq. 

Crewe,  Earl  of,  14;  on  the  budget, 
357  sq. ;  on  the  parliamentary 
conference,  430 ;  on  parliament 
bill,  431,  474  sqq. 

Cromer,  Earl  of,  on  old  age  pen- 
sions,  133 

Crooks,  W.,  on  old  age  pensions, 
133.   157  sqq. 

Davidson,  R.  T.,  on  old  age  pen- 
sions, 133;  on  housing  and  town 
planning,  266;  on  parhament  bill, 
437  sq. 
Death  duties,  352,  356,  372,  374,  417 
Denmark,  old  age  pensions  in,  139; 
land  development  in,  327  sq. ; 
afforestation  in,  367 


INDEX 


577 


Development  Act  (1909),  334  sqq. ; 

debate  on,  see  Land 
Dilke,   Sir  Charles,  on  workmen's 

compensation,   20,   38   sqq.,    506; 

on    minimum  wage   for  sweated 

labour,  227  ;  member  of  Housing 

Commission,  264 
Disraeli,  9 
Douglas,    A.    Akers.       See    Akers- 

Douglas,   A. 

Education,  cost  of,  107,  136 

Education  (Provision  of  Meals)  Act 
(1906),  debate  on,  108 sqq.;  statute, 
119  sqq. 

Education  Act  (1907),  109 

Education  bills,  18,  79,  443,  474, 479, 
491  sqq. 

Edward  VII,  264,  430 

Elections,  of  1906,  15  sqq.;  of  Jan- 
uary, 1910,  359  sqq.,  423  ;  of  De- 
cember, 1910,  431  sqq. 

Elgin,  Earl  of,  14 

Employers'  liability.  See  Work- 
men's compensation 

Fabian  Society,  12 

Factory  and  Workshop  Act,  31 

Finance  Act  (1909-1910),  debate  on, 
348  sqq. ;  statute,  408  sqq. 

Forestry.    See  Afforestation 

Forster,  H.  W.,  on  national  insur- 
^  ance,  507  sq.,  510,  555  sqq. 

France,  social  politics  in,  3  ;  work- 
men's compensation,  39  sq.,  72 
sqq. ;  meals  for  school  children, 
117  sq. ;  old  age  pensions,  162; 
labour  exchanges,  193  ;  sweated 
labour,  228;  afforestation,  367; 
Second  Chamber,  425,  461 

Free  Trade  and  old  age  pensions, 
148;  and  sweated  labour,  236  sq.; 
and  land  development,  328;  and 
finance,  347,  386  sq. 

French  Revolution,  i  sqq. 

Friendly  societies  and  national  in- 
surance, 512,  514,  528  sq. 

George,    David    Lloyd.     See  Lloyd 

George,  David 
George,  Henry,  351 


George  V,  430 

Germany,  social  politics  in,  3,  363 
sq.  ;  workmen's  compensation, 
38;  old  age  pensions,  139,  141 
sq.,  545 ;  labour  exchanges,  193, 
196  sq.,  211;  sweated  labour,  228, 
232,  242  ;  town  planning,  286  sq.  ; 
taxation,  350;  insurance,  363  sq., 
506,  517  sq.,  543  sqq.;  afforesta- 
tion, 367 

Ghent  system  of  insurance,  539  sq. 

Gladstone,  H.  J.,  14  ;  on  workmen's 
compensation,  20  sqq.,  45  sq. ;  on 
minimum  wage,  218 

Gladstone,  W.  E.,  10;  and  the 
House  of  Lords,  473 

Gore,  Charles,  Bishop  of  Birming- 
ham, on  housing  and  town  plan- 
ning, 266,  287  sqq. ;  on  the  bud- 
get, 357.  395  sqq- 

"  Gorringe  Case,"  354 

Grey,  Sir  Edward,  14;  on  the  Lords' 
veto,  428 

Llaldane,  Viscount,  14 

Halsbury,  Earl  of,  on  old  age  pen- 
sions, 133;  on  parliament  bill,  436 
sqq. 

Hamilton  of  Dalzell,  Lord,  on  mini- 
mum wage  for  sweated  labour, 
220,  241   sqq. 

Hardie,  J.  Keir,  12;  on  trade  unions, 
78 

Henderson,  Arthur,  on  unemploy- 
ment,   1S6,   209  sqq. 

Home  Rule,  425,  433,  436,  453,  47S 

Housing,  263  sqq. 

Housing  and  Town  Planning  Bill 
(1909),  relation  of,  to  child  wel- 
fare,109  ;  debate  on,  265  sqq.,  269 
sqq.;  statute,  291  sqq.;  relation  of, 
to  the  Lords'  veto,  423 

Housing  of  the  Working  Classes 
Act  (1S90),  270,  281,  283 

Income  Tax,  318,  372  sq.,  417 
Industrial  Revolution,  i,  263 
Infant  Life  Protection  Act  (1897), 

1-5 
Insurance.    See  National  insurance, 
and  Unemployment  insurance 


578 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


Irish  land  laws,  265 

Irish  party.    See  Nationalist  party 

Isaacs,  Rufus,  on  national  insurance, 

50S,  543  sqq. 
Italy,  workmen's  compensation  in, 

39  sq. 

Joint  sitting,  428,  480  sq. 
Juvenile  offenders,  127  sqq. 

Kingsley,  217 

Labour  exchanges  and  finance,  347; 
and  national  insurance,  538 

Labour  Exchanges  Bill,  debate  on, 
186  sqq.;  statute,  213  sqq. 

Labour  party,  establishment,  1 1  sqq., 
17,  19;  on  workmen's  compensa- 
tion, 34  sqq.,  43  sqq. ;  on  trade 
unions,  77  sqq. ;  on  payment  of 
members  of  parliament,  79,  102 
sqq.;  on  child  welfare,  108;  on 
old  age  pensions,  130  sqq.;  on 
unemployment,  186,  209  sqq.,  329 
sq. ;  on  sweating  and  minimum 
wage,  2 1 8,  238  sqq.;  on  housing, 
266 ;  on  land  development,  268, 
329  sqq.;  on  finance,  318  sqq.; 
on  the  Lords'  veto,  360,  421,  425, 
456  sqq.;  on  national  insurance, 
507  sq.,  547  sqq. 

Land,  monopoly  of,  5,  6,  264 ;  de- 
velopment scheme,  265,  267  sqq., 
314  sqq.,  366  sqq.,  423;  develop- 
ment and  finance,  347 

Land  taxes,  318,  353  sq.,  356,  375 
sqq.,  409  sqq. 

Lansdowne,  Marquess  of,  on  old 
age  pensions,  134;  on  the  budget, 
354  sq.,  357  ;  on  parliamentary 
conference,  431  ;  on  parliament 
bill,  431,  433,  435  sq.,  437,  485  sqq. 

Lansdowne  resolutions,  431,  497 ; 
support  of,  498  sqq. 

Law,  A.  Bonar,  on  labour  exchanges, 
186;  on  national  insurance,  510, 
563  sqq. 

Lee,  Arthur,  on  payment  of  mem- 
bers, 79,  102  sqq. 

Lever,  W.  H.,  on  old  age  pensions, 


Liberal  party,  achievements  of,  3, 
8  sqq. ;  in  House  of  Commons, 
18,  441  sq. ;  on  workmen's  com- 
pensation, 22  sqq.;  on  trade 
unions,  77  sqq.  ;  on  payment  of 
members  of  parliament,  79 ;  on 
child  welfare,  108 ;  on  old  age 
pensions,  130  sqq. ;  on  unemploy- 
ment, 1 86,  191  sqq.;  on  sweating 
and  minimum  wage,  218  sqq.,  241 
sqq. ;  on  housing,  265  sq.,  269 
sqq.,  278  sqq. ;  on  land  develop- 
ment, 267  sq.,  324  sqq.,  330  sqq. ; 
on  finance,  347  sqq.  ;  on  the 
Lords'  veto  of  the  budget,  358 
sqq. ;  on  powers  of  House  of 
Lords,  421  sqq.;  on  parliament 
bill,  431  sqq.;  on  national  insur- 
ance, 506,  511  sqq.;  checked  by 
House  of  Lords,  467  sq. 

Licensing  bills,  18,  125,  134,  475 

IJcensing  tax,  318 

Lloyd  George,  David,  14,  131  ;  on 
payment  of  members  of  parlia- 
ment, 102  ;  on  old  age  pensions, 
132,  140  sqq. ;  on  land  develop- 
ment, 268,  321  sqq.,  331  sq. ;  on 
the  budget,  347  sqq.,  361  sqq. ;  on 
the  Lords'  veto,  422,  470  sqq. ; 
on  the  parliamentary  conference, 
430;  on  national  insurance,  507, 
510  sqq. 

Lords,  House  of,  7,  iS;  workmen's 
compensation  bill,  22  ;  trade  dis- 
putes bill,  79  ;  old  age  pensions 
bill,  133  sq.,  160  sqq.;  labour  ex- 
changes bill,  187 ;  trade  boards 
bill,  220,  241  sqq.;  housing  and 
town  planning  bill,  266  sq.,  278 
sqq. ;  development  bill,  269,  330 
sqq.;  finance  bill  (1909-1910),  356 
sqq.,  361,  388  sqq.;  parliament 
bill,  431,  435  sqq.,  474  sqq.;  na- 
tional insurance  bill,  510  ;  commit- 
tee of,  on  sweating,  217;  committee 
of,  on  reform  of,  422  sq. ;  danger 
of  dispute  with  House  of  Com- 
mons, 163  sq. ;  a  check  on  Liberal 
legislation,  421,465  sq.;  debate  on 
reform  of,  424  sqq. ;  Lords'  veto 
and  the  budget,  352,  355,  399  sqq., 


INDEX 


579 


404  sqq.,  426 ;  restriction  of  pow- 
ers of,  439  sqq.,  449  sqq. 

Loreburn,  Lord,  on  parliament  bill, 
431,  496 

Lyttelton,  Alfred,  on  minimum  wage, 
21S  sq. ;  on  housing,  266 

Macdonald,  Ramsay,  on  payment  of 
members  of  parliament,  79,  102 
sqq. ;  on  unemployment,  185  ;  on 
national  insurance,  508,  510,  547 
sqq. 

Manning,  Cardinal,  264 

Marlborough,  Duke  of,  on  the  bud- 
get and  the  constitution,  357,  398 
sq. ;  on  parliament  bill,  437 

Masterman,C.F.G.,onthebudget,35i 

Medical  care,  30,  274  sq.,  278  sq., 
2S9,  310  sqq. ;  and  national  insur- 
ance, 523  sqq.,  548  sq. 

Mines  regulation,  31,  241 

Minimum  wage,  21S  sqq.;  legisla- 
tion concerning,  see  Trade  Boards 
Act  (1909) 

Money,  Chiozza,  on  labour  ex- 
changes,  1 86 

Montgomery,  H.  G.,  on  workmen's 
compensation,  20,  41  sqq. 

Morley  of  Blackburn,  Viscount,  14; 
on  the  budget,  357,  402  sqq.;  on 
reform  of  House  of  Lords,  425  sq. 

Motor  cars,  tax  on,  370  sq. 

National  insurance,  and  workmen's 
compensation,  45  sq.;  funds,  347  ; 
unemployment,  and  labour  ex- 
changes, 186,  199  sqq.;  debate 
on  bill  for,  507  sqq. 

Nationalist  party,  16  sq. ;  and  de- 
velopment bill,  320  sqq. ;  on  the 
budget,  349,  352  ;  on  the  Lords' 
veto,  425;  on  national  insurance, 

507,  535  sq. 

New  Zealand,  old  age  pensions  in, 
139  sq. 

Northumberland,  I^uke  of,  on  hous- 
ing and  town  planning,  267 

Notification  of  Births  Act  (1907), 
109,   122  sqq. 

Oastler,  217 


Old  age  pensions,  debate  on,  130 
sqq.;  Act  (190S),  167  sqq.;  Act 
(191 1),  176  sqq.;  finance,  347, 
362  sq. ;  and  national  insurance, 
511,  565  sq. 

Onslow,  Earl  of,  on  bureaucracy, 
266,  285  sq. ;  on  reform  of  House 
of  Lords,  426 

Osborne  Judgment,  79,  105 

Overcrowding,  263  sqq. 

Parliam.ent.    See  Commons,   House 

of,  and  Lords,  House  of 
Parliament  Bill,  debate  on,  421  sqq. ; 

exposition   of,   474  sqq.  ;    statute, 

502  sqq. 
Physical  deterioration,  107  sq.,  126 
Picketing,  peaceful,  13,  77,  80  sqq. 
Plural  voting,  19,  79,  443,  475 
Poor    Law  Commission,    131,    133, 

160,  163;  report  of,  185,  187  sqq., 

192  sq.,  197 
Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Children 

Act  (1894),  125  sq. 
Probation  of  Offenders  Act  (1907), 

109 
Protection,  and  sweated  labour,  237 ; 

and  finance,  347,  386  sq. 

Redmond,  John,  on  the  budget,  349 ; 
on  parliament  bill,  429  sq.;  on  na- 
tional insurance,  507,  516,  535  sq. 

Referendum,  42S,  439,  447,  463,  481 

Reid,  Sir  Robert,  14 

Revelstoke,  Lord,  on  the  budget, 
357.  394  sq. 

Reversion  duty,  378,  412 

Ribblesdale,  Lord,  on  the  budget, 
357'  397  ;  on  parliament  bill  and 
Lansdowne  resolutions,  431,  437, 
498  sqq. 

Richards,  T.  F.,  on  minimum  wage, 
219,  238  sqq. 

Right  to  Work  Bill,  210 

Ripon,  Bishop  of.  See  Boyd-Car- 
penter,  William 

Ripon,  Marquess  of,  14 

Roads,  314  sq.,  332,  340  sqq. 

Rosebery,  Earl  of,  on  old  age  pen- 
sions, 133,  163  sq. ;  on  self-reli- 
ance,  161  ;    on  the  budget,  352, 


58o 


BRITISH   SOCIAL  POLITICS 


355  sqq- ;  on  the  constitution,  399 
sqq. ;  onreformof  House  of  Lords, 
422,  424  sq. ;  on  parliament  bill, 
431,  438,  494  sq. 
Ruskin,  263 

Sadler,  217 

St.  Aldwyn,  Viscount,    on   old   age 

pensions,  133  ;  on  parliament  bill, 

436  sq. 
Salisbury,  Marquess  of,  on  minimum 

wage  for  sweated  labour,  220,  245 

sqq. 
Samuel,  Herbert,  on  child  welfare, 

109,  124  sqq. 
Self-reliance,  and  old  age  pensions, 

165  sq. ;  and  national  insurance, 

561  sqq. 
Shackleton,  D.,  on  the  Lords'  veto, 

421,  456  sqq. 
Shaftesbury,  6,  217 
Sheffield,  Lord,  on  the  budget,  357, 

390  sq. 
Sickness  insurance.     See   National 

insurance 
Sinclair,  John,  14 
Small  Holdings  and  Allotments  Act 

(1907),  265,  281,  330 
Small  Landholders  Act  for  Scotland 

(1911),  265 
Smith,  F.  E.,  on  trade  unions,  78  ; 

on  unemployment,  186,  206  sqq. 
Snowden,  Philip,  on  the  budget,  350, 

356,  381  sqq. 
Socialism,  as  distinct  from  Liberal- 
ism, 135;  and  land  development, 

327  sq. ;    and  the  Lloyd  George 

Budget,  348,  350,  381  sqq.,  392  sq., 

396;  and  the  parliament  bill,  433 
Stamp  duties,  375,  419  sq. 
Super-tax,  318,  373  sq.,  417  sqq. 
Sweated  labour,  217  sqq. 

Taff  Vale  decision,  12,  "]•] 

Tariff.  See  Free  Trade,  and  Pro- 
tection 

Taxation,  369  sq.,  379 

Tenement  houses.    See  Housing 

Tennant,  H.  J.,  on  minimum  wage, 
219,  226  sqq. 

Tory  party.    See  Conservative  party 


Toulmin,  George,  218 

Town   planning,  263  sq.,   271    sqq., 

279  sq.,  302  sqq.;  and  finance,  347 
Trade  Boards,  205,  220  sqq.;  debate 

on  Bill  (1909),  218  sqq. ;  Act,  247 

sqq. 
Trade  Disputes  Bill  (1906),  debate 

on,  77  sqq.,  443  sq. ;  statute,  85  sqq. 
Trade    Union    Act    (1871),    79,    87 

sqq.;    Act  (1876),  79,  95  sqq. 
Trade  unions,  13,  15,  •]•]  sqq.;  and 

national  insurance,  541  sq.,  564 
Tweedmouth,  Lord,  14 

Undeveloped  land  duty.    See  Land 

taxes 
Unearned  increment,  tax  on,  318, 

377.  409  sqq. 
Unemployed  Workmen  Bill  (1905), 

13  sq. 
Unemployment,  185  sqq.;  insurance, 

1S6,    199   sqq.,   365  sq. ;  and  land 

development,    329   sq.      See    also 

National  insurance 
Unionist   party.     See   Conservative 

party 
United  States,  social  politics  in,  4 ; 

labour  exchanges  in,  193;  sweated 

labour  in,  228;  Second  Chamber 

in,  425,  460  sq. 

Veto,  Lords'.  See  Lords,  House  of, 
and  Parliament  Bill 

Walton,  Sir  John,  on  trade  unions, 
77  sqq. 

Walton,  Joseph,  on  workmen's  com- 
pensation, 21,  46  sq. 

Wemyss,  Earl  of,  on  old  age  pen- 
sions, 133,  160  sqq. 

Willoughby  de  Broke,  Lord,  on  the 
budget,  357,  392  sq. ;  on  parlia- 
ment bill,  436 

Wilson,  W.  T.,  on  meals  for  school 
children,  108,  no  sqq. 

Workmen's  Compensation  Bill 
(1905),  13  sqq.;  Bill  (1906),  20sqq., 
506;  Act  (1906),  47  sqq. ;  Anglo- 
French  Convention  on,  72  sqq. 

Workmen's  insurance.  See  National 
insurance 


w 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


INTERLXBHAKY  LOANS 

MAR  1  9  ^1969 


WEEI£S  FROM  DATE  OF.  RECEia 


iREE 
,N-RENEWABL&*j 


IMR271969 


Form  L9-Series  444 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    000  898  376    9 


